Alaska Civil Pattern Jury Instruction 23.10

The plaintiff claims that the defendant is legally responsible for the conduct of [alleged agent]. The defendant denies that [he][she][it] is legally responsible for [alleged agent]’s conduct.

In order to find that the defendant is legally responsible for [alleged agent]’s conduct, you must find that each of the following is more likely true than not true:

(1) by words or conduct, [the defendant] authorized [alleged agent] to act on the defendant’s behalf, subject to [his][her][its] control;

(2) by words or conduct, [alleged agent] agreed to do so; and

(3) [alleged agent’s] conduct was within the scope of what the defendant authorized [alleged agent] to do.

To determine if [alleged agent]’s conduct was within the scope of what the defendant authorized [alleged agent] to do, you must consider the following factors:

(1) whether the defendant expressly authorized [alleged agent]’s conduct, or [alleged agent]’s conduct was similar to conduct that the defendant authorized, or [alleged agent]’s conduct was not a remote or improbable occurrence in connection with authorized conduct;

(2) whether [alleged agent]’s conduct occurred substantially within the time and place authorized by the defendant; and

(3) whether [alleged agent]’s conduct was motivated, at least in part, by an intent to serve the defendant.

The presence of a factor suggests that [alleged agent]’s conduct was within the scope of what the defendant authorized [alleged agent] to do. On the other hand, the absence of a factor suggests that [alleged agent]’s conduct was not within the scope of what the defendant authorized [him] [her] [it] to do.

In evaluating the factors, you may consider the following facts:

● the time, place and purpose of [alleged agent]’s conduct;

• any previous situations that involve the defendant’s authorization to [alleged agent];

• whether [alleged agent]’s conduct was outside the defendant’s area of business activity;

• whether the defendant had reason to expect that [alleged agent] would engage in the conduct;

• the similarity of [alleged agent]’s conduct to any conduct that the defendant expressly authorized;

• whether the defendant supplied any equipment or tools that [alleged agent] used when engaging in the conduct;

• whether [alleged agent] departed from the normal method of accomplishing an authorized result; and

• whether the [alleged agent]’s conduct involved a serious crime.