ME: Employer Not Vicariously Liable for Racial Slurs of Employee

The Maine Supreme Court recently considered whether an employer is liable for the racial slurs of its employees directed at customers:

Vargas v. Riverbend Mgmt. LLC, 2024 ME 27, at ¶¶ 1, 29-30, 314 A.3d 241, 244, 250-252 (2024) (holding that owner of fast-food restaurant was not vicariously liable under state human rights acts for employee’s racial slurs directed toward customers after his serving them concluded; “ ‘[An] employee's conduct is not within the scope of employment, although the employee is physically present on the employer’s premises, when the employee’s actions are far removed in purpose from work assigned by the employer.’ Restatement (Third) Of Agency § 7.07 cmt. d. . . . [A]lthough an employee’s intent to serve the employer’s interests often determines whether the employer is vicariously liable, it is not dispositive if the conduct is so extreme and remote from the employer’s interests that it could not reasonably have been intended to serve the employer. . . . ‘[I]ntentional misconduct that is distinct from an employee’s actions in performing assigned work . . . is not a risk that an employer can effectively control and its occurrence may be related causally to employment no more than to other relationships and circumstances in an errant employee's life more generally.’ [Id.], cmt. b.”)