Mr$.$ Snarey devised and conducted a fraudulent scheme while working as an agent of Mutual Life. What would the likely result be$?$

Select one:

a$.$

The doctrine of caveat emptor was applied.

b$.$

The company could be liable only if it were shown Snarey was an employee acting under the direction of a superior.

c$.$

Only the agent was liable, because the action taken was dishonest and therefore outside the scope of the agency relationship.

d$.$

Neither the agent nor the company could be liable, because Snarey was only an agent, and the company had no actual knowledge.

e$.$

Since Snarey was an agent with authority to enter into this general type of transaction, the company was vicariously liable for his conduct.