From our private database of 28,700+ case briefs...
Hinman v. Westinghouse
Supreme Court of California
471 P.2d 988 (1970)
Herman, an employee of Westinghouse (defendant), was driving home from a job site when he collided with Hinman (plaintiff), causing Hinman injuries. Under the standard union contract governing Herman’s employment with Westinghouse, Herman received compensation for his travel time and commuting expenses. Hinman brought a negligence claim against Westinghouse, claiming that Westinghouse was vicariously liable for Herman’s tort under the doctrine of respondeat superior. The trial judge refused to rule as a matter of law that Herman was acting within the scope of his employment, and instead instructed the jury to determine the scope of Herman’s employment. The jury found that Herman was outside the scope of employment, and accordingly returned a verdict in favor of Westinghouse.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Peters, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 546,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 546,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 28,700 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.