Recent Development: Antonio v. SSA SEC., Inc.: Upon Exhausting All Other Tools of Statutory Interpretation, Policy Considerations Revealed That the Maryland Legislature Did Not Intend to Abrogate the Common Law Doctrine of Respondeat Superior Through the Enactment of § 19-501 of the Maryland Security Guards Act

Authors

David BronfeinFollow

Abstract

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the Maryland Security Guards Act, Section 19-501 of the Maryland Code, Business Occupations and Professions Article (“section 19-501”) does not expand a security guard agency’s liability for unauthorized employee conduct; rather, the statute remains consistent with the liability prescribed by Maryland’s common law doctrine of respondeat superior. Antonio v. SSA Sec., Inc., 442 Md. 67, 90, 110 A.3d 654, 667 (2015). Finding the plain language, context, and legislative history of the statute to be ambiguous and unconvincing, the court was ultimately persuaded by policy considerations behind upholding the common law doctrine of respondeat superior.

Recommended Citation

Bronfein, David (2015) "Recent Development: Antonio v. SSA SEC., Inc.: Upon Exhausting All Other Tools of Statutory Interpretation, Policy Considerations Revealed That the Maryland Legislature Did Not Intend to Abrogate the Common Law Doctrine of Respondeat Superior Through the Enactment of § 19-501 of the Maryland Security Guards Act," University of Baltimore Law Forum: Vol. 46: No. 1, Article 4.
Available at: https://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/lf/vol46/iss1/4