Legal Opinion · Dissent

Rodebush Ex Rel. Rodebush v. Oklahoma Nursing Homes, Ltd.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided December 14, 1993No. 73340Published

1DissentSimms, Justice

I must respectfully dissent. Not only do I believe that the nursing home is not liable for the intentional tort of its employee, but I am also troubled by the majority’s determination that the cap on punitive damages may be lifted pursuant to 23 O.S.Supp.1986, § 9 under the facts of this case. In my estimation, this is, at best, a case of negligent hiring and training, and presents nothing further in the way of tort liability on the part of the nursing home.

I

RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR LIABILITY

It is settled law that in order to hold an employer liable for the intentional tort of its *1253employee, the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Mistletoe Express Service, Inc. v. CulpSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1959
  2. Hill v. McQueenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1951
  3. Russell-Lock Super-Service, Inc. v. VaughnSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  4. Tulsa General Drivers, Warehousemen, & Helpers Union v. ConleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1955
  5. Allison v. Gilmore, Gardner & Kirk, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1960

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API