Staff Sergeant William E. Dreyer was a recruiter for the United States Marine Corps. Driving to work one morning at 6:40 AM, in a government owned car, he struck and killed 12 year old Justin Zankel. The child’s parents sued the federal government, claiming that it was liable for Dreyer’s actions because he had been acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the accident.

The Marine Corps had provided Dreyer with a car to drive while on government business, but he was not permitted to use this car while commuting to and from home unless he had specific authorization from his boss, Major Michael Sherman. However, Sherman was flexible in giving authorization and even permitted his soldiers simply to leave a message on his voicemail. Indeed, he had only denied about one dozen such requests over a three-year period.

Each month, Dreyer was expected to meet specific quotas for the number of contracts signed and recruits shipped to basic training. However, despite working 16 to 18 hours every day of the week, Dreyer had not met his recruiting quotas for months. Sherman had formally reprimanded him and increased his target for the following month. 

On the day before the accident, Dreyer left home at 6:30 am, driving his own car. At the office, he switched to a government car and worked until 10:45 p.m. He then discovered that his personal car would not start. He did not want to call Sherman that late, so he drove his government car home without permission. He believed that, had he called, Sherman would have said it was ok. Dreyer arrived home at midnight. He was under orders to attend an early morning training session the next day. So he awoke early and left home at 6:35 a.m. At 6:40 a.m. his car hit Justin Zankel.

Questions:

1. Was Dreyer within the scope of employment when he killed Zankel?

2. What is the Latin term for the principle of liability relevant to this case and what is its English translation?

3. In general, are employers liable for torts committed by employees on their commutes to and from work?

4. If employers are not liable for torts committed during an employee’s commute, why was the US government held liable here?