Should an employer be liable for the torts of his employee if he was compelled to employ him?The master is charged with the obligation of selecting competent workmen. Therefore, if the element of employee selection is removed as a prerogative of the employer, does not this remove the master-servant relationship? If the employer through no fault of his own cannot completely direct and control the employee, is not the necessary privity between master and servant absent? Is it reasonable that the employer be liable for the misconduct of a person whose selection and/or control has been taken out of his hands? A review of existing case law is required to answer these questions.
James Balph, Employer's Liability for Employee He Was Compelled to Hire, 16 Clev.-Marshall L. Rev. 541 (1967)