32:T4e6,{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"Legislation","name":"Hoppe Ex Rel. Hoppe v. Deese, 232 N.C. 698","datePublished":"1950-11-22","legislationDate":"1950-11-22","citation":"Hoppe Ex Rel. Hoppe v. Deese, 232 N.C. 698 (N.C. 1950)","countryOfOrigin":"USA","jurisdiction":"Supreme Court of North Carolina","description":"Read the full text of Hoppe Ex Rel. Hoppe v. Deese (Hoppe Ex Rel. Hoppe v. Deese, 232 N.C. 698 (N.C. 1950)). This legal opinion, filed in 1950-11-22, from the Supreme Court of North Carolina discusses important legal matters. Access this case and related legal documents on Midpage, an AI-powered legal research platform.","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://app.midpage.ai/document/hoppe-ex-rel-hoppe-v--1314611"},"author":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Midpage"},"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Midpage"},"url":"https://app.midpage.ai/document/hoppe-ex-rel-hoppe-v--1314611","isPartOf":{"@type":"WebSite","name":"Midpage","url":"https://app.midpage.ai"},"inLanguage":"en","keywords":"legal, opinion, document, research, midpage, Hoppe Ex Rel. Hoppe v. Deese, Supreme Court of North Carolina, Hoppe Ex Rel. Hoppe v. Deese, 232 N.C. 698 (N.C. 1950)","isAccessibleForFree":true,"isFamilyFriendly":true}34:T4d4, EbviN, J.

A master is civilly liable for an assault and battery by his servant on a third person if, and only if, it is committed while the servant is acting within the course and scope of his employment. According to the allegations of the complaint, the male defendant assaulted the feme plaintiff to carry out an independent and licentious purpose of his own, and not to accomplish the business mission entrusted to him by the corporate defendant. This being true, the ruling on the demurrer was correct; *699 for it appears upon tbe face of tbe complaint tbat tbe wrongful act of tbe male defendant was outside the scope of his employment. Robinson v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 216 N.C. 322, 4 S.E. 2d 889; Robinson v. McAlhaney, 214 N.C. 180, 198 S.E. 647; Snow v. DeButts, 212 N.C. 120, 193 S.E. 224; Smith v. Cathey, 211 N.C. 747, 191 S.E. 505. Tbe judgment sustaining tbe demurrer is

Affirmed.