|
|
| |
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases —
for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case —
for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more.
lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
|
| |
Federal Courts -
U. S. Supreme Court - January 22 - January 24, 2003
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Meyer v. Holley, No. 01-1120,
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, January 22, 2003, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: The officer was found to be subject to vicarious liability under the FHA for the allegedly discriminatory conduct of its salesperson, even though the officer did not personally engage in any unlawful conduct. The United States Supreme Court unanimously held, however, that vicarious liability under the FHA was limited to liability of the real estate company, but not its officer, in accordance with traditional agency principles. Neither the right of the officer to control the salesperson, nor the overriding societal priority of the FHA's objectives warranted extending tort-related vicarious liability rules to include the officer, in the absence of a clear indication of congressional intent to abrogate the common law principles of vicarious liability. Further, the application of traditional vicarious liability to the FHA was supported by the administrative interpretation of the FHA, and there was no support under the FHA itself for imposing a non-delegable duty upon the officer to ensure that its salesperson did not discriminate.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|
