Holding Employers Accountable: The Impact of New York Court of Appeals’ Decision on Negligent Supervision and Retention Liability

Employers have a duty to adequately supervise and retain their employees, especially in the financial sector where large sums of money are at stake. When employers fail to fulfill this duty, they may face liability for the damages caused by their employees. The Moore Charitable Foundation v. PJT Partners case is a perfect example of this type of negligence liability. This article will provide a detailed analysis of the case and discuss the lessons employers can learn from it.

Background on the Moore Charitable Foundation v. PJT Partners case: PJT Partners is an investment bank, and Park Hill Group is one of its divisions. The Moore Charitable Foundation hired PJT Partners to manage its assets, and PJT Partners assigned an employee to work on the account of the Moore Charitable Foundation.

The employee’s behavior and actions while working for PJT Partners

The employee succeeded in bringing a substantial amount of work for the employer. However, as time passed, the employee allegedly started showing signs of dangerous and destructive behaviors during work hours. These behaviors included excessive drinking, obsessive personal stock trading, and engaging in unprofessional conduct.

Diversion of $8.1 million fee

In 2014, an employee landed a large deal involving the recapitalization of a private equity fund managed by Irving Place Capital. He ended up diverting the $8.1 million fee to himself for the purpose of purchasing securities through his personal account. This action caused significant financial losses to the Moore Charitable Foundation.

After the deal was closed in 2015, some of the employer’s other workers asked the employee about the delayed payment of the fee. He lied, stating that a “stub closing” had to be completed before the fee would be paid. The employer did not challenge the employee’s explanation or make further inquiries. This lack of due diligence by the employer contributed to the fraud.

The employee was later found out and pleaded guilty to securities and mail fraud charges. He received a four-year sentence of imprisonment for his criminal actions related to diverting the $8.1 million fee.

Foundation’s lawsuit against PJT Partners

The Moore Charitable Foundation sued PJT Partners to recover its losses. The foundation alleged that PJT Partners was liable for negligent supervision and retention, conversion, and fraud.

The Court of Appeals for the State of New York issued a decision reinstating the negligence claim, which the foundation had adequately pleaded. The lower courts should not have dismissed it at the pleading stage. This decision reaffirms that employers must exercise due diligence in supervising their employees to avoid liability for their actions.

Employers’ duty to supervise employees extends beyond customer relationships. Second, the court emphasized that the employer’s duty to supervise its employee did not only extend to dealings with customers. A customer relationship was not a prerequisite for filing a negligent supervision claim. Therefore, employers must supervise their employees in all aspects of their job, regardless of whether or not it involves customers.

Court’s analysis of employee behavior and its implications for employer liability

The court acknowledged that excessive drinking and obsessive personal stock trading might be unprofessional or irresponsible for a financial advisor. However, these acts were not illegal, tortious, or indicative of dishonesty or a propensity to mislead or intentionally harm others. This analysis highlights the importance of employers considering all aspects of their employees’ conduct and behaviors when making decisions about their supervision and retention.

The Moore Charitable Foundation v. PJT Partners case serves as a reminder to employers of their duty to supervise and retain their employees. Negligent supervision and retention can lead to significant financial losses and legal liability. Employers must exercise due diligence in supervising their employees in order to avoid such situations. The court’s decision in this case provides further clarity on the extent of the employer’s duty and their potential liability. Employers should take note of the lessons learned from this case to ensure they are adequately supervising and retaining their employees.

Explore more

Prioritizing Mental Health in Remote and Hybrid Workspaces

The shift to remote and hybrid work models has fundamentally transformed the modern workplace, offering unprecedented flexibility and accessibility for employees across various industries, while also introducing new challenges to mental well-being. With the reduction of commuting stress and the ability to tailor work environments to personal needs, these setups have gained immense popularity among workers, including those with disabilities

Building an AI Work Culture That Embraces Honest Learning

What happens when a workforce feels compelled to bluff its way through the complexities of artificial intelligence? In today’s fast-paced corporate landscape, countless professionals nod confidently in meetings, toss around AI buzzwords, and keep tools like ChatGPT open on their screens, all to mask a startling truth: many lack the deep understanding they project. This silent charade, driven by fear

How Can Leaders Support Grieving Employees Effectively?

Imagine a workplace where an employee, grappling with the sudden loss of a loved one, returns to their desk only to face mounting deadlines and unspoken expectations, while the weight of grief clouds their focus, leaving no clear path to seek support or understanding. This scenario is far too common, as many organizations overlook the profound impact of loss on

How Can You Reignite Employee Engagement After Summer?

As summer fades into fall, a palpable shift occurs in workplaces across the Northern Hemisphere, where calendars once dotted with out-of-office replies now brim with meetings, deadlines loom larger, and the pressure to meet year-end targets intensifies. Yet, amid this transition, a troubling undercurrent persists: employee engagement often takes a nosedive. Why does this seasonal pivot feel like such a

Automated Hiring Tools: Alienating Top Talent?

What happens when the very tools designed to uncover top talent end up alienating the most promising candidates? In a job market where a single position can attract thousands of applicants, employers increasingly turn to automated hiring assessments to manage the deluge, yet beneath the promise of efficiency lies a troubling reality. These systems are reshaping how job seekers approach