Chapter 32, Section 32-4, Practice and Review, Exercise 1, 2, 3, and 4

James Blatt hired Marilyn Scott to sell insurance for the Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company. Their contract stated, "Nothing in this contract shall be construed as creating the relationship of employer and employee." The contract was terminable at will by either party. Scott financed her own office and staff, was paid according to performance, had no taxed withheld from her checks, and could legally sell products of Massachusetts Mutual' s competitors. Blatt learned that Scott was simultaneously selling insurance for Perpetua Life Insurance Corporation, one of Massachusetts mutual' s fiercest competitors. Blatt therefore withheld client contact information from Scott. Scott complained to Blatt that he was inhibiting her ability to sell insurance for Massachusetts Mutual. Blatt subsequently terminated their contract. Scott filed a suit in New York's state court against Blatt and Massachusetts Mutual. Scott claimed that she had lost sales for Massachusetts Mutual --and commission -- as a result of Blatt's withholding contact information from her. Using the information presented in the chapter, answer the following questions:

1. Who is the principal and who is the agent in this scenario? By which method was an agency relationship formed between Scott and Blatt?

2. What facts would the court consider most important in determining whether Scott was an employee or an independent contractor?

3. How would the court most likely rue on Scott's employee status? Why?

4. Which of the four duties that Blatt owed Scott in their agency relationship has probably been breached?