Determine the factors to establish the "scope of employment" under the doctrine of respondeat superior. Discuss its importance in regards to the employer. Distinguish between a "detour" and a "frolic." Do you agree with the decision from Case Example 21.17 (Mandel)? Why? READ BOTH OF THE FOLLOWING CASES FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION: Workers Compensation is an issue which many employees will face sometime during their working years. This case introduces you to Ms. Jacqueline Fernandez, who is seeking workers compensation as a result of an automobile accident. Using an internet search engine, locate and read the case, 2800 Corp. v. Fernandez, and determine if Fernandez is indeed entitled to workers compensation. Explain your answer. This case discusses the hiring, retention, and supervision of employees. Locate this case in a search engine and read Yunker v. Honeywell, Inc. Did you agree with the court's ruling? Why?

EXAMPLE 21.17 While driving his employer's vehicle to call on a customer, Mandel decides to stop at his bank- which is one block off his route-to make a personal deposit Mandel then negligently runs into a parked vehicle owned by Kelly. In this situation, because Mandel's detour from the employer's business is not substantial, he is still acting within the scope of employment, and the employer is liable. The result would be different, however, if Mandel had decided to pick up a few friends for cocktails in another city and in the process had negligently run into Kelly's vehicle. In that situation, the departure from the employer's business would be substantial, and the employer normally would not be liable to Kelly for damages. Mandel would be considered to have been on a "frolic" of his own