Bell Department Store Case Summary

The shopkeeper’s privilege does not protect Walmart from liability under the circumstances of the case. Although Navarro had the right to exercise shopkeeper’s privilege, Navarro had not enough evidence to consider Cockrell as a suspect and it is not reasonable that Navarro asked Cockrell to take off the bandage. According to the merchant protection statutes, merchants can stop, detain, and investigate suspected shoplifters without being held liable for false imprisonment if (1) there are reasonable grounds for the suspicion, (2) suspects are detained for only reasonable time, and (3) investigations are conducted in a reasonable manner (Cheeseman, 2015, P.87). Navarro was not fulfilled for the third condition because the investigation is unreasonable on putting the suspect in a risk of death. Since there was a risk of bacterial infection and it may cause death after the wound area exposed under the air, Navarro should

(2) it was at least reasonable for jury to determine that, absent warnings, hiring one guard who primarily remained inside store was an insufficient response to known, repeated history of attacks on premises; and

Details of incident: Defendant and his friend went to the same store where he was arrested previously for shoplifting. He threw a beverage to the security’s face and slapped him. Defendant got really angry when he saw the security. Defendant thinks he was responsible for his arrest in the past because the security caught him for shoplifting. As the defendant is

The Georgia Shopkeeper’s Defense statute bars the Plaintiff’s suit. The statute bars recovery for false imprisonment by merchants or their agents when all of its elements are met. The Shopkeeper’s Defense statute provides in order to preclude recover the following three elements must be present: (1) reasonable suspicion of shoplifting, (2) reasonable time of detention, and (3) reasonable manner of detention. Ga. Code Ann. § 51-7-60 (2015). The Plaintiff and Defendant have agreed that the Plaintiff’s behavior on September 29, 2015, was sufficient to cause a reasonable person to suspect her of shoplifting, and that the length of the Plaintiff’s detention was reasonable. Therefore, the only element in dispute is the reasonableness of the manner in which the Plaintiff was detained. As such, R-Mart should be protected under the statute and the Plaintiff could only recover for false imprisonment if the facts alleged in the complaint demonstrates the manner was unreasonable.

Both the family, and the Wal-Mart acknowledge that the family was detained. The Wal-Mart associates believed that they had the right to stop the family based on the assumption of shoplifting, although they should not have physically restrained the family from advancing out of the store, nor denied Debra McCann’s offer of verifying the family’s identity.

The plaintiff (Southern Prestige Industries, Inc.) initiated an action against the defendant (Independence Plating Corp.) in a North Carolina state court for a breach of contract. The plaintiff alleged that defects in the defendant’s anodizing process caused the plaintiff’s machine parts to be rejected by Kidde Aerospace. The defendant being a New Jersey corporation and having its only office and all of its personnel situated in the state filed a motion to dismiss citing lack of personal jurisdiction. The trial court denied the motion and the defendant appealed arguing that there were insufficient contacts to satisfy the due process of law requirements

Can you explain why the store did not take pictures of the incident scene and the plaintiffs’ shopping cart? This question would cast doubt on if the store was trying

There is an ethical side to this story because there may be the possibility that the store associate or customer had lied and said that they stole something when they really had not. Sometimes if there is a conflict between two people one person might say something bad in order to get the other person into serious trouble. In a case like this then there would be some serious issues that come into play. The person that is accusing the wrongdoer would get into trouble for false accusations. Then again they may also be correct and that person may be guilty of stealing items in the store. It is helpful when there are cameras involved that can be reviewed so that there is more evidence to suggest whether or not a crime had been committed. It just goes to show that no matter what the situation is the police always need to look at both sides of the situation.

State which of Pam’s rights were violated in the situation. The 4th amendment was violated. The officer did not ask to search even though the person blurted out they had drugs in the car.

Defendants, Mark and William Schenkly, have not satisfied the elements required to invoke the shopkeeper’s privilege defense. Conduct by the suspect which lead a shopkeeper to believe that the suspect is attempting to steal is enough to establish reasonable cause. In assessing reasonable cause to detain, Arizona courts consider whether appearances are sufficient to justify a shopkeeper’s belief is reasonable. Kon v. Skaggs Drug Center, Inc., 563 P.2d 920, 922 (1977); Gau v. Smitty’s Super Valu, Inc., 901 P.2d 455, 459 (1995). Defendant Mark Schenkly did not see Mr. Flynn take beer from the cooler, nor did he observe that the beer was missing from the cooler. The statute setting forth the requirements for asserting the shopkeeper’s privilege provides that detainment may only take place for the sole purposes of questioning or

Facts: A Texas bank was held up on September 21, 1964 there were two employees (witness's) in the bank. Subsequently, on April 2, 1965 Billy Joe Wade and two other suspects were arrested and charged with the Bank Robbery crime(s). An FBI lineup was arranged without notice that contained up to six prisoners and Wade. No defense counsel was present to represent Wade and he was picked out of the lineup as the bank robber. The trial found bank employees cross examined relative to the lineup. (1.)

Peter Flores, president of Salem Telephone Company (STC) informed the Public Service Commission “that a profitable computer service Subsidiary would reduce pressure for the telephone rate increase.” And a result, Salem Data Services (SDS) was established. In 2003, SDS has “yet to experience a profitable month” and this induced the meeting between Peter Flores and Cynthia Wu, manager of SDS in April 2004. Flores and Wu held different views in regards to SDS; Flores felt SDS was draining STC resources and is questioning the ability of SDS to be a profitable business. Wu felt that SDS had the ability to show profits in the near future. To adequately prepare Flores, president of STC for his meeting with Wu, he assigns a task to

Based on J.C.Penney’s current situation, and the above issues, we recommend the following strategic models.

CEO John McDonough decided on making acquisition of Calphalon and Rubbermaid, which influent shareholders’ confidence.

Tort law is a very prevalent aspect of conducting business and daily life in the twenty first century. According to the textbook, The Legal Environment of Business, tort law provides “remedies for the invasion of various protected interests.” (Cross & Miller, 2012) In this essay about tort law, I will talk about a tort case that has personally impacted me. To do so, I will provide a background of the event, apply facts of the case to applicable law, summarize lessons of the week as they relate to this case and provide a plausible argument for the parties involved.