The Pusey v. Bator case gives us an opportunity to analyze agency relationships and the liabilities that flow from those relationships. The facts are as follows: Grief Brothers Corporation, a steel drum manufacturer, owned and operated a manufacturing plant in Youngstown, Ohio. In 1987, Lowell Wilson, the plant superintendent, hired Youngstown Security Patrol, Inc. (YSP), a security company, to guard Greif’s property and “deter thieves and vandals.” Some YSP security guard, as Wilson knew, carried firearm. Eric Bator, a YSP security guard, was not certified as an armed guard but nevertheless took his gun in a briefcase to work. While working at the Greif plant on August 12, 1991, Bator fired his gun at Derrell Pusey, in the belief that Pusey was an intruder. The bullet struck and killed Pusey. Pusey’s mother filed suit in an Ohio state court against Greif and others, alleging in part that her son’s death was the result of YSP’s negligence, for which Greif was responsible. Let’s start out by discussing agency law and trying to analyze the case one step at a time. First, let’s try to determine what kind of agency relationship may have existed, if any. Was Bator an agent of Greif brothers or was he an independent contractor. If he was an independent contractor, does Greif brothers have any liability for his actions. If so, why. If not, why not.