(citations omitted). In the present matter, Plaintiff has not alleged that Defendant induced Sean McGuigan to steal from Plaintiff or otherwise approved of his conduct. Although some cases have found vicarious liability for an employee’s illegal conduct, in those cases the illegal conduct in question benefitted the employer in some tangible way. Cf. CompuDyne Corp. v. Shane, 453 F.Supp.2d 807, 831 (S.D.N.Y.2006) (finding that the defendant-employer may be liable for its employee’s illegal trades because the defendant benefitted financially from the scheme). Since Plaintiff has not alleged that Sean McGuigan’s conduct benefitted Defendant in any way, or that Defendant induced his conduct, the Court finds that Plaintiff has . 03 Civ. 5055, 2004 WL 2072032, *5 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2004) (<HOLDING>) (citation omitted); Gottlieb v. Sullivan &
recognizing distinction made by majority recognizing the majority rule holding that employers are not liable for conduct of ordinary employees because an ordinary employees conduct will normally be so unrelated to the employers business that it cannot be deemed in furtherance thereof holding that the majority view is that employers are not liable for theft committed by employees holding that individual employees are not liable under title vii