WPI 50.07 Principal Sued But Not Agent—Agency or Authority Denied
6 WAPRAC WPI 50.07Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil
6 Wash. Prac., Wash. Pattern Jury Instr. Civ. WPI 50.07 (7th ed.)
Washington Practice Series TM
Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil
April 2022 Update
Part VI. Agency and Partnership—Torts
Chapter 50. Agency and Partnership—Torts
WPI 50.07 Principal Sued But Not Agent—Agency or Authority Denied
[(Principal's name)is sued as the principal and the plaintiff claims that(agent's name)was acting as an agent.(Principal's name)[denies that(agent's name)was acting as an agent and] [admits that(agent's name)was acting as an agent but denies that the agent] was acting within the scope of authority.]
If you find that(agent's name)[was the agent of(principal's name)and] was acting within the scope of authority, then any act or omission of(agent's name)was the act or omission of(name of principal).
If you do not find that(agent's name)was acting [as the agent of(principal's name)or] within the scope of authority, then(principal's name)is not liable.
NOTE ON USE
For the scope of this instruction, see WPI 50.00 (Introduction).
Use bracketed material as applicable. The entire bracketed first paragraph may be omitted from this instruction and included instead in the statement of the claims and issues in WPI 20.01 (Issues).
If the instruction is not suitable, see WPI 50.06 (Both Principal and Agent Sued—Agency or Authority Denied) or the more general instructions, WPI 50.01 (Agent and Principal—Definition), WPI 50.02 (Agent—Scope of Authority Defined), WPI 50.02.01 (Agent—Scope of Apparent Authority Defined), and WPI 50.03 (Act of Agent is Act of Principal).
Use WPI 50.01 (Agent and Principal—Definition) with this instruction.
Use this instruction only when there is an issue as to agency. If there is no issue as to agency and the principal only is sued, use WPI 50.05 (Principal Sued But Not Agent—No Issue as to Agency or Authority). If there is no issue as to agency and both principal and agent are sued, use WPI 50.04 (Both Principal and Agent Sued—No Issue as to Agency or Authority).
COMMENT
In Titus v. Tacoma Smeltermen's Union Local No. 25, 62 Wn.2d 461, 469, 383 P.2d 504 (1963), the court held that a union may be liable for assaults committed by its members while picketing, providing it is done in the furtherance of the union's business and within the scope of employment. The court stated that it is the general rule that a master may be held liable for the tortious acts of his servant, although he may not know or approve of them, if such acts are done within the scope of the employment. Titus, 62 Wn.2d at 469.
In Nelson v. Broderick & Bascom Rope Co., 53 Wn.2d 239, 332 P.2d 460 (1958), the principal was sued but not the agent. The principal was not held liable for the acts of the agent committed at a time when the agent “was not furthering his master's business or acting in any manner pursuant to his master's authority at the time the injury was inflicted.” Nelson, 53 Wn.2d at 242.
[Current as of November 2021.]
Westlaw. © 2022 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works.
| End of Document |