Allison v. American Airlines
Decision Date | 14 April 1953 |
Docket Number | Civ. No. 3132. |
Citation | 112 F. Supp. 37 |
Parties | ALLISON v. AMERICAN AIRLINES. Inc. et al. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Oklahoma |
Disney, Hart & Disney, Tulsa, Okl., for plaintiff.
Debevoise, Plimpton & McLean, New York City, and Savage, Gibson & Benefield, Oklahoma City, Okl., for defendant.
The plaintiff, Wayne Allison, brings this action against American Airlines, Inc., a corporation, and Joe S. Anderson, an employee of the defendant corporation.
The plaintiff now moves to remand this action to the State Court inasmuch as both the plaintiff and the defendant, Anderson, are citizens of the State of Oklahoma.
Defendant, Anderson, is charged with having "falsified records and misrepresented facts" which brought about a breach of an employment contract between the plaintiff and the defendant, American. Thus in substance the defendant, Anderson, is charged with "inducing" a breach of contract and with interfering with business relations.
Defendant, American, is sued for breach of contract.
There is a very serious question whether a cause of action is stated against Anderson individually; the allegations in the complaint state in substance that Anderson was acting within the scope of his employment and that any acts which in fact were without the scope of his employment were subsequently ratified in their entirety by American.
Generally, where an employer ratifies the tortious acts of its servant, this does not absolve the employee from personal liability for the tort, but does thereby make the employer equally liable for its commission. However, in this case, such does not follow, inasmuch as the tort committed, if any, by the employee is for "inducing" a breach of contract; thus, although an employer may be guilty of breaching its contract, it cannot be guilty of "inducing" the breach of its own contract; and, the liability of the employer is limited to compensatory damages directly flowing from such breach.1
In Vassardakis v. Parish the court said:2
Thus, as there is no express allegation that Anderson, the employee, personally benefited from his acts which lead to the discharge of the plaintiff by the defendant, American, it is very questionable that a cause of action is stated against Anderson; it may well be argued that what Anderson did, he did for the good of American and that with American's subsequent ratification of all his acts, American must solely be looked to for damages...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Wise v. Southern Pac. Co.
...Canister Co. v. National Can Corp., supra, 96 F.Supp. 273; Sax v. Sommers (1951) Sup., 108 N.Y.S.2d 467; Allison v. American Airlines (U.S.D.C.Okl.1953) 112 F.Supp. 37; Barber v. Stephenson (1953) 260 Ala. 151, 69 So.2d 251; and Hein v. Chrysler Corp. (1954) 45 Wash.2d 586, 277 P.2d 708. It......
-
K & K Management, Inc. v. Lee
...631 F.Supp. 1417 (W.D.Tex.1986); Stratford Group, Ltd. v. Interstate Bakeries, 590 F.Supp. 859 (S.D.N.Y.1984); Allison v. American Airlines, 112 F.Supp. 37 (N.D.Okla.1953); Rozell v. Stiefermann, 726 S.W.2d 342 (Mo.App.1987); Murtha v. Yonkers Child Care Ass'n, 45 N.Y.2d 913, 383 N.E.2d 865......
-
Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation v. Taylor
...Elec. Co., 222 F.Supp. 473 (W.D.Mo.1963), with Shelley v. The Maccabees, 180 F.Supp. 517 (E.D.N.Y.1959), and Allison v. American Airlines, Inc., 112 F.Supp. 37 (N.D. Okl.1953). 13 Compare Charles Dowd Box Co. v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., 303 F.2d 57 (1st Cir. 1962), and Young Spring & Wire C......
-
Yaindl v. Ingersoll-Rand Co. Standard Pump-Aldrich Division
...91 Wash.2d 36, 586 P.2d 482 (1978); Patterson v. Philco Corp., 252 Cal.App.2d 63, 60 Cal.Rptr. 110 (1967); Allison v. American Airlines, Inc., 112 F.Supp. 37 (N.D.Okl.1953). And see Restatement (Second) of Agency, § 248, comment c (1958) (master not liable in tort for act of servant who imp......