Which circumstance would prevent a landscape contractor's invoice from constituting a vicarious admission by the homeowner?

Which circumstance would prevent a landscape contractor's invoice from constituting a vicarious admission by the homeowner?

• A. The landscaper is the homeowner's employee.
• B. The homeowner paid the invoice promptly.
• C. The landscaper is not an employee or agent of the homeowner.
• D. The invoice is authenticated and admitted by stipulation.

Answer: (C)

A vicarious admission binds a party when a statement is made by the party’s agent or employee within the scope of the agency. An invoice from a landscape contractor can function as such an admission only if the contractor is acting as the homeowner’s agent or employee who is authorized to speak for the homeowner about the work and its charges. If the landscaper is not an employee or agent of the homeowner, the homeowner isn’t bound by the contractor’s statements in the invoice. So the circumstance that would prevent the invoice from being a vicarious admission is that the landscaper is not an employee or agent of the homeowner. In that case, the homeowner cannot be bound by the invoice. The other possibilities either would support a vicarious admission (if the landscaper were an employee/agent) or do not affect the admission status in the same way.

A vicarious admission binds a party when a statement is made by the party’s agent or employee within the scope of the agency. An invoice from a landscape contractor can function as such an admission only if the contractor is acting as the homeowner’s agent or employee who is authorized to speak for the homeowner about the work and its charges. If the landscaper is not an employee or agent of the homeowner, the homeowner isn’t bound by the contractor’s statements in the invoice.

So the circumstance that would prevent the invoice from being a vicarious admission is that the landscaper is not an employee or agent of the homeowner. In that case, the homeowner cannot be bound by the invoice. The other possibilities either would support a vicarious admission (if the landscaper were an employee/agent) or do not affect the admission status in the same way.