Case Analysis : R Mart Employee

1265 Words Feb 4th, 2016 6 Pages
A. The manner in which Abagnale was detained is reasonable because the employee acted within the proper discharge of his duties and only to the extent necessary to investigate and ascertain the truth.

The manner in which R-Mart employees detained the Plaintiff was reasonable because R- Mart employee, Nottingham, only guided the Plaintiff to the back room after she refused to accompany him voluntarily, acting within his given duties. Likewise, R-Mart employee, Carl Hanratty reviewed the security recordings and the Plaintiff was free to leave immediately thereafter. The employee’s actions, as described in the Plaintiff’s Complaint, bar the Plaintiff from recovery under the Georgia Shopkeeper’s Defense statute.
Courts determine the manner of detention to be reasonable whenever an employee acted within the proper discharge of his duties or to the extent necessary to investigate or ascertain the truth. Courts determine the manner to be unreasonable only if the plaintiff can show excessive and aggressive physical contact. Accusatory commentary expressed during the course of the detention is immaterial, as courts have determined the statements fall under the protection of the statute. Godwin, 172 S.E.2d 467, 467-71 (Ga. App. 1970), Tomblin v. S.S. Kresge Co., 207 S.E.2d 693, 693-97 (Ga. App. 1974), Colonial Stores, Inc. v. Fishel, 288 S.E.2d 21, 21-24 (Ga. App. 1981), Mitchell v. Walmart Stores, Inc., 477 S.E.2d 631, 631 (Ga. App. 1996), Brown v. Super Discount Markets, Inc., 477…

More about Case Analysis : R Mart Employee

Open Document