What common-law claims does Paula Prentiss have against GCI relating to the accident and resulting chemical spill?
Paula Prentiss may have a claim against GCI for negligence. Negligence is defined as conduct that falls below the standard established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm. Restatement Second, Torts, 282. Tom, who is an employee of GCI, drove the truck too fast around a corner and lost control, thereby causing the truck to leave the road, slide down the embankment and onto Paulas property, where the tank leaked and spilled chemicals into Paulas pond. Tom is an employee of GCI and his accident occurred within the scope of his employment as a driver for GCI. An employee whose work involves traveling for a company is within the scope of his employment if he is in transit after starting his work. Because of the employer/employee relationship between GCI and Tom, vicarious liability extends to GCI under the doctrine of respondeat superior. In an action for negligence, Paula must show: duty; breach of duty; actual causation and harm; proximate cause; and dama
