Question from Qwertie, Are there Minnesota cases where intoxication excluded an employee from their scope of employment?
Answer from AI:
In general, an employee’s actions are considered within the “scope of employment” when they are performing duties related to their job or acting on behalf of their employer. However, certain behaviors, such as being intoxicated at work, can potentially exclude an employee from their scope of employment.
Minnesota Case Law
While there may not be a specific Minnesota case where an employee’s intoxication was the sole factor in determining they were outside their scope of employment, there are cases where an employee’s behavior, including potential intoxication, was considered.
For example, in the case of Lundberg v. All-Star Pest Control, the Minnesota Supreme Court considered whether an employee’s sexual assault of a customer was within the scope of his employment. While the employee’s potential intoxication was not the primary focus, the court considered his behavior in determining he was outside his scope of employment.
In determining whether an employee’s actions fall within the scope of employment, courts often consider factors such as:
- Whether the action was similar to the employee’s regular duties
- Whether the action occurred within work hours and locations
- Whether the action was partly intended to serve the employer
- Whether the employer could reasonably expect the employee to perform such an action
Intoxication can potentially influence these factors. For example, an intoxicated employee may be more likely to act in ways that are dissimilar to their regular duties, outside of work hours and locations, and without intent to serve their employer.
If you are an employee facing potential legal issues related to intoxication at work, or an employer dealing with such an employee, it is recommended that you consult with a legal professional. They can provide personalized advice based on your specific circumstances and the relevant laws and case law in your jurisdiction.