McCann v Wal-Mart Inc. Essays

715 Words Apr 19th, 2014 3 Pages
McCann v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Louisiana Eastern District Court
210 F.3d 51 (1st Cir. 2000)
Debra McCann and two of her children (Jillian, and Jonathan) were shopping in Bangor, Maine Wal-Mart on December 11th, 1996. After about an hour and a half, the McCann’s paid for their purchases and proceeded to leave the store. On the way out two Wal-Mart employees (Jean Taylor and Karla Hughes) blocked their path to the exit and stood in front of the McCann’s’ shopping cart. Note Taylor may have actually put her hand on the cart. The employees told McCann that her child had previously stolen from the store and was not allowed in the store. Defendant’s employees told McCann they were calling the police. Defendant did not actually
…show more content…
McCann was rewarded $20,000 in compensatory damages by the jury.
2. No. United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit rejected Wal-Mart’s appeal claiming that the plaintiff (McCann) did not prove false imprisonment under Maine law and that the court's jury instructions on false imprisonment were a mistake.
3. No. United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuits rejected Wal-Mart’s second appeal stating the district court should have charged that "actual, physical restraint". Basically wanting a description of what was not confinement.
4. Yes. United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit accepted McCann’s cross-appeal. The defendant (Huges) denied McCann’s son (Jonathan) the bathroom. Wal-Mart’s policy say’s to ask prior shoplifters to leave the store and not to rather detain them. The action of Hughes's pointing her finger at Jonathan accusing him of stealing was not considered reckless or negligent but “outrageous”. Jonathan was awarded $10,000 and $5,000 awarded to his mother and sister each.
The Maine District Court focused on McCann’s claim that they were falsely imprisoned in the Wal-Mart store by Wal-Mart employees. The court looked at elements of the tort of false imprisonment under Maine law. The defendant referenced to the police is enough to say reasonable people would believe either that they would be restrained physically if they wanted to leave. The definition of false imprisonment can be

More about McCann v Wal-Mart Inc. Essays

Open Document