tortfeasor

If the code is the contract, each of those actors is individually liable as a tortfeasor.

I am curious why Kansas law allows in the case of an out-of-state tortfeasor applying the laws of the tortfeasor's state for damage limits.

However, respondeat superior does not apply when the tortfeasor (the person who acted negligently) is an independent contractor.

> while the owner is responsible Yes, exactly--just as any other tortfeasor is responsible.

The tortfeasor would likely only be responsible for the losses that would have likely occurred if the pandemic had been handled competently.

That works fine when it is hard to have big torts that cause so much damage that the tortfeasor cannot cover it.

Second, by having different limits depending on whether it is a Kansas company or not, it means that different Kansas plaintiffs who suffer similar injuries from a tortfeasor in Kansas can face vastly different damage limits depending on where the tortfeasor happens to be incorporated.

Legislator is damn lucky the tortfeasor was from out of state.

The concept you’ve tripped over here is called intervening superseding causes and the criminal only destroys the tortfeasor’s liability if his intervening criminal cause is unforeseeable.

Consider: under the common law, the tortfeasor owes 100% of the loss, in any conceivable circumstance (this being the beauty of common rather than statutory law).

Impossible to know without the actual employment documents, but also curious if the DoJ could be considered a tortfeasor for disrupting an employment contract in that case.

Well, get back to me when negligence is punished like fraud, since the impact on the victim can be just as drastic regardless of tortfeasor's intent or lack of same.

As the great Professor Hecker repeated so often in Business Associations - “The tortfeasor is always liable.” E.g.

A tort is a civil wrong by which the actor committing the tort ("tortfeasor") is responsible to pay in damages for all harm caused by his tortious activity.

I just learned of the term "tortfeasor".

In this case, the employer would be the tortfeasor, who convinces the employee ("a party") to breach their contract (the employee's agreement to abide by Facebook's acceptable use policy in exchange for access to Facebook), and Facebook would be the plaintiff.