BORG-WARNER

Borg-Warner Protective Services Corp. v. Superior Court

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 960·75 Cal. App. 4th 1203·89 Cal. Rptr. 2d 687·99 Daily Journal DAR 11025
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 28, 1999E023754California3,180 words

Opinion

Opinion

Richli, J.

We hold that a security guard company is not liable for the arson committed by one of its employees who was acting outside the course and scope of his employment. In so holding we determine that Business and Professions Code section 7582.15 does not abolish the common law doctrine of respondeat superior in requiring that an employee be acting in the scope of employment in order to hold an employer liable for the employee’s acts.

We conclude, therefore, that the trial court erred in denying summary adjudication of a cause of action which seeks to hold a security guard company vicariously liable based on section 7582.15. Accordingly, we will grant the petition for writ of mandate.

Factual and Procedural Background

The employer in this case is petitioner Borg-Warner Protective Services Corporation doing business as Wells Fargo Guard Services (hereafter Wells Fargo). It contracted with Syroco, Inc. (hereafter Syroco) to provide security guards at the latter’s Corona plant where Syroco manufactures plastic chairs. On March 9, 1996, a fire occurred at that plant. William Yrigoyen, one of the security guards on duty at the time, pleaded guilty to arson in connection with the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.