UT · jury_instructions
MUJI 2d CV2808
Scope of employment; dual purpose.
If [name of employee]'s [describe act or omission] was motivated to benefit [name of employer], then the conduct was within the scope of employment even though [name of employee] was also pursuing some personal interest.
However, if [name of employee]'s primary motivation was personal, then [his] conduct was not within the scope of employment, even though [he] may have also transacted some business or performed some duty related to [his] employment.
[Where [name of employee] is involved in an accident while traveling for [name of employer], you should ask whether the trip was one for which [name of employer] would have had to send another employee to the same destination or to perform the same task if the trip had not been made.]
Provenance
- Source
- legacy.utcourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-22
- Edition
- 2026-08-21
- Content hash
576dc92ba809b8c2f71e668430038c828e968a4928eab29f6e8dece5c71f2e49
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.