Going Postal

[Rip Verkerke <ripv@virginia.edu>]

A student asked:

        I was thinking about the ever more common
workplace shootings by workers and wondered if they are
considered outrageous acts by courts?  I don't really know
if these shootings are personally motivated.  However, they
seem to be related to stress and dissatisfaction in the
workplace.  Would this then make employers liable for these
acts?
        I would be very interested in your thoughts on
these matters.

Rip responded:

The short answer is that most jurisdictions would not hold employers liable
for seemingly random shootings by employees (e.g., going "postal").  But you
might be able to argue for negligence liability if the employer failed to
take appropriate action after receiving notice of a specific threat.

Of course, your suggestion about a possible workplace cause (stress and
dissatisfaction) shows again how expansive the Bushey enterprise liability
approach could be.  In this day and age, workplace shootings are certainly
not utterly unforeseeable.  However, traditional concerns about unduly
expanding respondeat superior liability would almost always force plaintiffs
to rely on negligence theories instead.

Regards,

Rip