Sandra hired Jeff to work as a tax driver for Sandra. Jeff had a long criminal record for violent assaults, including three instances of vehicular homicide. However, Sandra was not aware of this and she does not check employee's criminal records. After a long hot summer day of city driving, Ben, another driver, cut Jeff off and slightly dented Jeff's cab. Jeff became enraged. He pulled Ben out of his car and hit him with a brick that was lying on the side of the road. Ben suffered serious and permanent injuries and wants to sue. Who is liable in this situation: Group of answer choices Both Jeff and Sandra because of the employer's direct liability for wrongful hiring Neither since Ben was the instigator Only Jeff as Sandra was unaware of Jeff's criminal history Only Sandra because of vicarious liability

Both Jeff and Sandra because of the employer's direct liability for wrongful hiring

Explanation:

Based on the information given above, both Jeff and Sandra are liable. Jeff committed the offence and Sandra is liable because of her direct liability for wrongful hiring.

Direct liability refers to an economic entity's legal obligation as a result of an act of negligence which results in damages to properties or injuries to humans.

Therefore, both Jeff and Sandra are liable.

your just wasting your lol

hi : ) i found this so i hope this !

"we first find value of tax in dollars.

the difference between the two prices   is: 23. 54 - 22 = 1.54

therefore the sales tax in dollars is 1.54

the tax % will be   (amount of tax / original cost price ) × 100

(1.54 / 22) × 100  → (0.07) × 100 =   7

so the tax rate is 7%

we can double check the answer.

7 % of 22   → (7/100) × 22 → 0.07 × 22 = 1.54

22 + 1.54 = 23.54"