Respondeat Superior Paper Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Respondeat Superior Paper - Assignment Example The significance of this doctrine is that it gives the injured party the chance to recover losses or damages incurred, by making the employer liable for all the injuries brought about by an employee’s actions, provided that this employee is operating within the scope of employment. In this case stated, the surgeon has a vicarious liability for the patient’s death. It is very determinable that the nurse-anesthetist’s action led to the death of the patient. It is the nurse-anesthetist who had administered anesthesia without paying close attention to the patient’s oxygen intake. The nurse-anesthetist’s negligence also caused her to fail to detect the vital signs of lack of oxygen, until the patient reached the precipice of a cardiac arrest. This alone gives a very strong ground for a Respondeat Superior case. Some of the Respondeat Superior lawsuits include death, injury, or incomplete treatment. Like this case, most Respondeat Superior cases stem from an unintentional and unforeseen failure to detect or carry out an action. It is beyond gainsay that both the surgeon and the nurse-anesthetist did not intend to harm the patient, but their unforeseen failure caused the patient’s death. It is also imperative to note that the nurse-anesthetist was acting as an employee in the line of duty. ... The import is that the deceased patient’s family, as well as the plaintiff, will easily prove that the nurse-anesthetist is an employee of the surgeon’s institution. Similarly, all the acts she had carried out were part of the treatment. The administration of anesthesia was done to prepare the patient for surgical intervention. This will greatly help the plaintiff prove that the nurse-anesthetist erred within the scope of employment. In another wavelength, noting that vicarious liability entails strict secondary responsibility is also important in understanding the surgeon’s liability for the nurse-anesthetist’s actions. This aspect of secondary liability is brought about by the surgeon being superior to the nurse-anesthetist. It is because of this hierarchical relation between the surgeon and the nurse-anesthetist that not only makes the nurse-anesthetist to prepare the patient for the surgeon’s work, but also makes the surgeon responsible for all the acts executed by his subordinate, the nurse-anesthetist. Again, Lewis and Gardner (2000) divulge that the conditions that describe vicarious liability are very wide, thereby giving the surgeon’s culpability a wider threshold. Particularly, vicarious liability in Respondeat Superior broadly imputes responsibility on any third party, provided that the third party possesses the authority and duty of control. The gravity behind this development is that even if the plaintiff may not in the court of law identify the very nurse-anesthetist; yet, by adducing the results of the investigations, the plaintiff will have rendered the surgeon fully liable. Since the results