Swierczynski v. O'Neill
41 A.D.3d 1145, 840 N.Y.S.2d 855 (2007)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under the doctrine of respondeat superior, an employer is not liable for an employee's negligence while driving home from their last field appointment if the employee has been given permission to leave for the day, as the employee is no longer under the employer's control.
Facts:
- Joan O’Neill was employed by the County of Erie as a child protective caseworker.
- O'Neill's job required her to use her personal vehicle to travel from the office to conduct field visits.
- On the day of the accident, O'Neill signed out of her office in the afternoon to conduct field visits.
- After completing her final field visit, O’Neill obtained permission from her supervisor to leave work for the day and go directly home.
- The collision occurred as O’Neill was driving on the route home from her last field visit, a route different from her normal commute from the office.
- While driving home, O'Neill's vehicle struck a vehicle operated by Raymond Swierczynski.
Procedural Posture:
- Plaintiffs commenced a personal injury action against Joan O’Neill and her employer, the County of Erie, in the Supreme Court, Erie County, a trial-level court.
- Plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability against the County of Erie.
- Defendant County of Erie filed a cross-motion for summary judgment seeking to dismiss the amended complaint against it.
- The trial court granted plaintiffs' motion and denied defendant's cross-motion, adjudging the County of Erie liable for O'Neill's conduct.
- The County of Erie, as appellant, appealed the trial court's order to the Supreme Court, Appellate Division.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the doctrine of respondeat superior make an employer liable for an employee's negligence in a car accident that occurred while the employee was driving home from her last field appointment after having received permission to end her workday?
Opinions:
Majority - Memorandum Opinion
No. The doctrine of respondeat superior does not apply because the employer is only liable for an employee's negligence when the employee is acting within the scope of employment and under the employer's control. The general rule is that an employee driving to and from work is not acting in the scope of employment because the element of control is lacking. The exception for employees who use their car for work (like traveling salespeople) applies only when the employer has control from the time the employee leaves home until they return. Here, O'Neill's workday ended when she received permission from her supervisor to leave for the day from her last appointment. At that moment, she was no longer acting in furtherance of any duty owed to her employer and was no longer under its control, making her commute home a personal activity.
Dissenting - Fahey, J.
Yes. The doctrine of respondeat superior should apply because the employment created the necessity for the travel. The dissent argues that the crucial test is whether the employment created the need for the employee to be on the particular route where the accident occurred. Because O'Neill's final field visit dictated her travel route—a route she would not have otherwise taken—her travel was fundamentally employment-related. But for her final work appointment, she would not have been on that road, making this a 'textbook example of employment-related travel' for which the employer should be held liable.
Analysis:
This decision narrows the 'coming and going' rule's exception for employees who use their vehicles for work. The court prioritizes the element of direct employer 'control' over a 'but for' causation test based on the travel route. This makes it more difficult to hold employers liable for accidents during an employee's commute home from a non-office location, establishing a clearer line where the scope of employment ends. For liability to attach, the employee must not only be on a work-mandated route but must also remain actively under the employer's control, which ceases upon being dismissed for the day.
