Under Georgia’s former Respondeat Superior Rule, an employer was generally entitled to summary judgment on direct liability claims such as negligent hiring, retention, supervision, or entrustment where it had admitted its vicarious liability for the employee’s negligence. 116 Ga. App. 848, 853-686, reversed on other grounds, 224 Ga. 263 (1968). Generally, when an employee causes an injury to another, the test to determine if the employer is liable is whether the employee was at the time of the injury acting within the scope of his employment and on the business of the employer. Accordingly, under Georgia’s long-standing Respondeat Superior Rule, Georgia courts held that where an employer admitted it was vicariously liable for its employee’s negligence, direct claims for negligent entrustment, hiring, training, and/or retention would not entitle a plaintiff to a greater recovery but would merely serve to prejudice the employer and potentially lead to double dipping.
In 2005, Georgia’s massive tort reform movement led to the enactment of the apportionment statute, codified at O.C.G.A. § 51-12-33. Pursuant to the apportionment statute, a Georgia jury is required to apportion fault for an injury amongst all responsible parties and non-party tortfeasors pursuant to each’s percentage of fault. In November 2020, in Quynn v. Hulsey, et al. the Georgia Supreme Court considered whether the long-standing Respondent Superior Rule had been effectively abrogated by the apportionment statue.
Quynn involved a claim for wrongful death against Hulsey and his employer, TriEst, for the death of Brandon Lanier. Hulsey was operating his employer’s vehicle when he struck and killed Lanier while Lanier crossed the road. The trial court granted partial summary judgment to TriEst on the plaintiff’s direct liability claims for negligent entrustment, hiring, training, and supervision based upon the Respondeat Superior Rule. TriEst did not dispute that it was vicariously liable for Hulsey’s negligence. After trial on the negligence claims, the jury found Hulsey/TriEst to be 50% at fault and Lanier to be 50% at fault, with the result that the plaintiff was precluded from recovering any damages pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 51-12-33(g).
The Quynns appealed, claiming in part that the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to TriEst on the direct liability claims, pursuant to the Respondeat Superior Rule, was inconsistent with the apportionment statute because the jury was not permitted to apportion any fault to TriEst as an independent tortfeasor. The Georgia Supreme Court agreed with the appellant.
The Georgia Supreme Court was clear that any fault apportioned to the employer would have to be for its own independent negligence and not for vicarious liability. With the elimination of the decisional Respondeat Superior Rule, employers that litigate in Georgia will no longer be able to automatically obtain summary judgment on direct liability claims where they have admitted vicarious liability for an employee’s negligence. We anticipate seeing an increase in discovery regarding an employer’s hiring, supervision, and training practices, even in straight-forward admitted liability matters.