PJC General Negligence 2022

A GENCY AND S PECIAL R ELATIONSHIPS

PJC 10.11

PJC 10.11

Joint Enterprise

QUESTION ______ On the occasion in question, were Paul Payne and Tim Thomas engaged in a joint enterprise? A “joint enterprise” exists if the persons concerned have (1) an agreement, either express or implied, with respect to the enterprise or endeavor; and (2) a common purpose; and (3) a community of pecuniary interest in [ the common purpose of the enterprise ], among the members [ of the group ]; and (4) an equal right to a voice in the direction of the enterprise, which gives an equal right of control. Answer “Yes” or “No.” Answer: _______________ COMMENT When to use. “Joint enterprise” liability makes each party thereto the agent of the other and thereby holds each responsible for the negligent act of the other. Texas Department of Transportation v. Able , 35 S.W.3d 608, 613 (Tex. 2000); Shoemaker v. Estate of Whistler , 513 S.W.2d 10, 14 (Tex. 1974). In Shoemaker the court adopted the formulation of joint enterprise as stated in the Restatement (Second) of Torts §491 cmt. c (1965): The elements which are essential to a joint enterprise are commonly stated to be four: (1) an agreement, express or implied, among the members of the group; (2) a common purpose to be carried out by the group; (3) a commu nity of pecuniary interest in that purpose, among the members; and (4) an equal right to a voice in the direction of the enterprise, which gives an equal right of control. Shoemaker , 513 S.W.2d at 16–17. Before Shoemaker , Texas cases had applied a broad interpretation of the doctrine of joint enterprise. In analyzing distinctions between partnership, joint venture, and joint enterprise, the court noted that “in interpreting joint enterprise, some courts have retained the business character of joint venture as a requirement, while others have manifested a broader view of the doctrine.” Shoe maker , 513 S.W.2d at 16. Shoemaker limited the application of joint enterprise to cases in which there is a business or pecuniary purpose to the enterprise. Shoemaker , 513 S.W.2d at 17. See also Able , 35 S.W.3d at 613–14. In the past joint enterprise was often applied in automobile cases to impute the neg ligence of the driver of the vehicle to a passenger. W. Page Keeton et al., Prosser and

139