Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A person who works in the service of another under an express or implied contract of hire, under which the employer has the right to control the details of work performance.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Law Firm Sanction for Associate Filing
Eastern Electric's in-house counsel Enzo Eastwood filed a complaint containing unsupported factual denials. After notice, the court found a Rule 11 violation. The firm was held jointly responsible because Eastwood acted as its employee.
Admissible Statement by Warehouse Worker
Equinox Energy was sued after a delivery error. Its warehouse supervisor Elliot Edmonds told a customer the shipment had been approved internally. The customer's testimony repeating that statement was admitted as non-hearsay because Edmonds spoke on a matter within the scope of his employment.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Statutes
Federal Rules
Uniform Acts
Model Codes
Common Law
Restatements
Elena Estrada left her post at a state environmental agency and joined a private firm. She sought to represent Everest Holdings in a permitting dispute she had personally handled as a government employee. The firm declined the matter absent agency consent because Estrada's prior substantial participation disqualified her.
Privileged Counseling Session for Officer
Edgar Evers, a police officer employed by the city, met with a licensed social worker after a shooting incident. The department later sought the session notes in litigation. The court upheld the psychotherapist privilege and barred disclosure of the confidential communications made during diagnosis and treatment.
Injunction Denied on Exclusive Service Contract
Emma Erickson signed an agreement to perform design work exclusively for Echelon Security. After she accepted a position elsewhere, the company sought an injunction. The court refused enforcement because it would compel continued personal relations or leave Erickson without reasonable means of livelihood.
Derivative Suit Against Former Manager
Erika Echevarria, a former employee of Everest Holdings, was sued derivatively by the corporation for approving an unauthorized contract. The court permitted the proceeding because the statute expressly allows actions against incumbent or former employees for corporate acts.
Common questions
Frequently Asked
5
How does an employee differ from an independent contractor?+
An employee works under an express or implied contract of hire with the employer controlling the details of performance. An independent contractor retains control over the manner and means of work. The distinction determines vicarious liability and tax treatment.
Supporting sources
When is a law firm responsible for Rule 11 violations by its employee?+
Absent exceptional circumstances, a law firm is jointly responsible for a Rule 11 violation committed by its associate or employee. The court may impose sanctions after notice and opportunity to respond.
Are statements by employees admissible as non-hearsay?+
A statement by a party's employee is not hearsay if made on a matter within the scope of the employment relationship and while it existed. The statement is considered but does not alone establish the relationship's existence or scope.
What limits apply to a former government employee's private practice?+
A lawyer who participated personally and substantially in a matter as a public employee may not represent a client in that matter without informed written consent from the appropriate government agency.
When will a court refuse to enjoin an employee from working elsewhere?+
A promise of exclusive personal service will not be enforced by injunction if it would compel undesirable personal relations or leave the employee without other reasonable means of making a living.
571 U.S. 117 (2014)Civil Procedure
…[its] own account.” App. 179a. The agreement “does not make [MBUSA] . . . a general or special agent, partner, joint venturer or employee of DAIMLERCHRYSLER or any DaimlerChrysler Group Company”; MBUSA “ha[s] no authority to make binding obligations for or act on behalf of DAIMLERCHRYSLER or any DaimlerChrysler Group…