Negligence: Respondeat Superior-Exclusion of Hiring/Training/Supervision Practices

Plaintiff appealed from the trial court’s judgment that awarded her compensatory damages but denied punitive damages in her negligence action against defendant under a theory of vicarious liability. Plaintiff challenged the trial court’s exclusion of evidence of defendant’s hiring, training, and supervision practices and policies, arguing that the preclusion on such evidence where an employer admitted vicarious liability was excepted for claims for punitive damages.

Where the evidence plaintiff sought to admit was not relevant to her claim of punitive damages since that claim was not based on a theory of direct liability against defendant employer, the trial court correctly excluded the evidence.

Judgment is affirmed.

Badillo v. The Home City Ice Company (MLW No. 79746/Case No. SD37398 – 6 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Sheffield, J.) Appealed from circuit court, Wayne County, Seay, J. (Joseph Hoffman, of Baldwin, for appellant) (James Harkins, of St. Louis, for respondent)