Corporate and Personal Liability

Corporateand Personal Liability

Corporateand Personal Liability

Corporationsand individuals can be held liable for their respective actions,especially when those actions cause damage to another person.However, there must be a clear evidence of the relationship betweenthe actions or inactions of the corporation or an individual and thealleged damages. In the case of Richard Smith, the administrator of anursing home and Darling Hester, the administrator of Hazelton’sestate, both the trial and the appellant courts ruled in the favor ofSmith. This is because the plaintiff could not provide sufficientevidence to establish the relationship between Smith’s actions oromissions and the death as well as the suffering of Maggie Hazelton(Evashwick &amp Riedel, 2004).

AlthoughSmith was in charge of all administrative functions of the nursinghome, he could not be held liable for all actions or omissions of theemployees of that facility. The law requires that an administrator orany other officer be held liable when they fail to do something thatalready know that it is their responsibility to do it or take actionsthat cause injuries to people that they are expected to protect(Evashwick &amp Riedel, 2004). The day-to-day actions of nurses atthe nursing home were beyond the immediate control of Smith, whichmeans that he could not be held personally for their misconducts.

Insteadof suing Smith, the facility administrator, Hester, should have madea claim against the nursing home. The nursing home, as a corporate,could be held liable for the mistakes done by its nurses under theprinciple of respondeat superior. The nursing home could be heldliable for the actions of its employees as long as those actions werecommitted in the course of discharging their duties (Evashwick &ampRiedel, 2004). Therefore, the nursing home should have been heldliable, and not the administrator.

Conclusion

Administratorsmay be held individually liable when their omissions or commissionsare directly linked to the injuries suffered by plaintiff. Some ofthe activities that could result in the personal liability on thepart of the administrator include fraud or any other activity that isintended for personal gain. This explains why Smith could not be heldpersonally liable, even if it could be true that death of Hazeltonwas caused by nurses’ negligence. However, the nursing home couldbe held liable for the misconducts of its juniors.

References

Evashwick,C., &amp Riedel, J. (2004). Managinglong-term care.Washington, DC: Association of University Programs in HealthAdministration.