Rudgeair v. Reading Traction Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Rudgeair v. Reading Traction Co., 180 Pa. 333 (Pa. 1897)
36 A. 859; 1897 Pa. LEXIS 925
Fell, Green, McCollum, Sterrett, Williams

Rudgeair v. Reading Traction Co.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

The testimony offered in this case shows that plaintiff was *338assaulted on the street and beaten by John Yan Reed, an employee of the Traction Company, defendant; but it clearly appears that in tb e commission of the assault and battery Yan Reed was not acting within the scope of his employment as a motorman of the company, or by the authority or direction of any of its officers or agents. The principle, respondeat superior, has no application to such a purely personal trespass as that disclosed by the evidence prepared. The court was therefore clearly right in refusing to take off the nonsuit.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Joseph Rudgeair v. Reading Traction Company
Cited By
12 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Master and servant — Assault and battery — Scope of employment — Street railway company. A motorman in the employ of a street railway company who leaves his car and commits an assault and battery upon one who is driving a team on the track of the company, is not acting within the scope of his employment, or by authority of its officers or agents, and the company is not liable in damages.