## Facts

- A nonprofit operated “One Step At A Time” cancer camp in Wisconsin; the entity later became Ronald McDonald House Near Children’s Memorial Hospital, Inc.
- Camp leaders and administrators were required to attend an annual orientation weekend and a mandatory meeting on Friday night, June 6, 1997.
- After the Friday night meeting ended, volunteer camp leaders Daniel Baum, Steven Berger, and Susan Delanty left camp in Baum’s personal sports car and went to a local bar.
- At the bar, Baum and Berger watched basketball; Baum drank about five beers over roughly two hours; Delanty worked on some camp-related documents.
- While driving back to camp late on June 7, 1997, Baum lost control on a curve, causing a crash that killed Berger and permanently injured Delanty.
- Berger’s estate and Delanty sued Baum and the nonprofit, alleging the nonprofit was vicariously liable under respondeat superior because Baum was acting as its agent/employee during the trip.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for the nonprofit on the vicarious-liability claim.

## Issues

1. Whether Baum was acting within the scope of an agency/employment relationship with the nonprofit during the off-site trip and return drive, permitting vicarious liability under respondeat superior.
2. Whether the scope-of-agency question could be resolved as a matter of law on summary judgment given the undisputed facts about the outing’s time, place, and purpose.

## Decision

- The appellate court affirmed summary judgment for the nonprofit.
- The court held that, even assuming Baum had an agency relationship with the nonprofit as a volunteer leader, his bar outing and return drive were outside the scope of that relationship.
- The court concluded there was no genuine issue of material fact because the relevant circumstances showed a personal, recreational excursion after official camp business had ended.

## Legal Principles

- Respondeat superior requires proof that the challenged conduct was of the kind the agent was engaged to perform, occurred substantially within authorized time and space limits, and was motivated at least in part by a purpose to serve the principal.
- Conduct undertaken after scheduled work ends, off premises, for primarily personal or social reasons is generally outside the scope of agency/employment.
- Incidental or voluntary work activity during a social outing does not, by itself, convert the outing into conduct serving the principal when the dominant character of the trip is personal.
- Where material facts on time, place, purpose, and lack of authorization are not genuinely disputed, scope of agency may be decided as a matter of law at the summary-judgment stage.

## Conclusion

The court held the nonprofit was not vicariously liable for the volunteer driver’s negligence because the trip to and from a bar after a mandatory meeting was a personal frolic, not conduct undertaken to serve the camp, making summary judgment appropriate.


Alms v. Baum, 343 Ill. App. 3d 67, 796 N.E.2d 1123 (Ill. App. Ct. 1st Dist. 2003)