When the employee was acting “in the prosecution and within the scope of” the employer’s business, O.C.G.A. § 51-2-2 makes the employer answer for the employee’s negligence. Driving a company vehicle on a delivery route is the plain case. A commute home is generally not within scope, though there’s a presumption argument when the employee is driving an employer-owned vehicle, which the employer can rebut.
Other routes reach the company for its own conduct:
| Claim | What it requires |
|---|---|
| Negligent hiring or retention | Employer knew or should have known of the driver's tendency |
| Negligent entrustment | Actual knowledge of incompetence |
| Negligent training or supervision | Inadequate oversight tied to the crash |
| Motor carrier rules | Federal or state safety regulation, in a commercial case |
Quynn v. Hulsey (2020) changed how these work: the Georgia Supreme Court held that the “Respondeat Superior Rule,” which used to dismiss direct claims once an employer admitted responsibility, “has been abrogated by OCGA § 51-12-33.” So a jury can hear them and apportion fault.
An independent contractor changes the first question. Section 51-2-4 says an employer generally isn’t liable for one “exercising an independent business” outside its direction and control, though § 51-2-5 lists exceptions. Delivery gig work and truck leases can raise this question.
A rideshare has its own statute at § 33-1-24 setting insurance rules. Punitive damages don’t reach an employer through the uncapped DUI route, which is limited to the “active tort-feasor,” § 51-12-5.1(f).
Early evidence includes the driver’s logs, dispatch records, and phone data, and the crash may need a letter asking the company to keep them. Workers’ compensation applies if the injured person also worked for the employer.
General information about Georgia law as of November 2026. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship.