General > Political Discussion

Wal-Mart

<< < (4/15) > >>

MOMAS2:
Nurse Detained and Prosecuted on Suspicion of Shoplifting — $128,050 Kansas Award

Plaintiff, a 23-year-old nurse, sued Wal-Mart for false arrest, invasion of privacy, outrageous conduct and malicious prosecution after being detained outside the store, accused of shoplifting, arrested and prosecuted. The court dismissed all of the charges. Plaintiff charged that Wal-Mart wanted to perform a strip search. She also contended that the store planted the evidence in her bag. Wal-Mart argued that the merchandise found in the plaintiff’s shopping bag was not listed on the sales ticket. The jury awarded plaintiff $57,100 for false arrest, $2,200 for invasion of privacy, $24,000 for outrageous conduct and $44,750 for malicious prosecution.

Wash v. Wal-Mart, Wyandotte (KS) District Court, Case No. 89C-3338. Bryson R. Cloon, Overland Park, KS for plaintiff. Robert F. Rowe Jr., Kansas City, KS for Wal-Mart.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Alabama Woman Sues Store for False Imprisonment After Being Detained on Suspicion of Shoplifting — $200,000 Award Affirmed

Plaintiff sued Wal-Mart for false imprisonment after a store employee questioned and detained her on the suspicion that she stole a coat from the store. The Alabama Supreme Court affirmed the jury’s $200,000 award.

Wal-Mart v. Sharon Jones, 533 So.2d 551(Ala. 1988). Ronald A. Drummond, Scottsboro, AL for plaintiff. Donna S. Pate, Huntsville, AL for Wal-Mart.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Woman Sues Store for False Arrest and Malicious Prosecution After Being Detained and Prosecuted on Suspicion of Shoplifting — $20,850 Arkansas Award Affirmed

Plaintiff sued Wal-Mart for false arrest and malicious prosecution after being detained by a store employee on the suspicion that she stole a pen from the store. Plaintiff claimed that she had forgotten to pay for the pen. The Wal-Mart employee called the police, initiated a prosecution for shoplifting, and continued the prosecution even though the City Attorney recommended that the prosecution be dismissed. The employee claimed that he was unaware of the store’s shoplifting procedure. The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the jury’s $850 compensatory damages award and $20,000 punitive damages award..

Wal-Mart v. Katherine Yarbrough, 681 S.W.2d 369 (Ark. 1984). William T. Morris, Fort Smith, AR for plaintiff. J.L. Hendren, Bentonville, AR for Wal-Mart.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Shopper Sues Wal-Mart After Being Detained and Searched on Suspicion of Shoplifting -- $300,000 Texas Award

Plaintiff, age 39, sued Wal-Mart after being detained, escorted to a store office, and searched on the suspicion that he had stolen something from the store. As plaintiff was leaving the store, a Wal-Mart loss prevention associate grabbed his shoulder, spun him around and, with two other employees, took him to the back office.

Inside the office, the employee acknowledged that he had not seen plaintiff conceal any merchandise. Nonetheless, he demanded that plaintiff empty his pockets and drop his pants. After plaintiff refused to drop his pants, the employee ordered plaintiff to raise his shirt. Plaintiff explained that his torso was heavily bandaged because he had recently undergone three major surgeries in connection with a liver transplant. The employee ordered him to remove his bandages. Plaintiff contended that he could not remove the bandages, since he had to take precautions to ensure that the wound would not be exposed in an unsterile environment.

Plaintiff claimed that the employee disregarded his expressed concern over exposing his wound and continued to demand that he remove the bandages. Afraid that the employee would remove the bandages himself, plaintiff carefully loosened the bandages. This satisfied the employee, so he told plaintiff that he was free to leave. The employee refused to apologize or explain his actions. Plaintiff alleged that an assistant store manager and support manager witnessed the entire interrogation and search, but did nothing to stop it.

The trial court granted Wal-Mart's motion for a directed verdict on the intentional infliction of emotional distress and malice claims. Subsequently, the jury awarded plaintiff $300,000.

Carl W. Cockrell v. Wal-Mart, Matagorda County (TX) District Court. Case No. 98-H-0059-C. Scott Broussard and Anthony R. Segura, Houston, TX for plaintiff. J. Preston Wrotenbery, Houston, TX for Wal-Mart.

B o n s t e r:
Mike (or Mike's secretary):

Rather than hide behind the law, some issue of personal rights, copy & paste of other rulings, why not give us base logic as to why they shouldn't check receipts?

It's pretty easy to do, yet your actions and reactions don't lend credence to anything you post in your defense. 

menace2society:
Why should someone check my receipts when I am leaving a store?  I just paid for my items and walked 10 feet to the door, past nothing I could steal between the check-out and the door.  It makes no sense and I often feel harassed when I am asked for a receipt to leave a store.  It's an annoyance and when I am done shopping, I am in a hurry to get out of the store.  Leave me alone.

n01_important:
To reiterate a previous point... Walmart can easily check the receipt on their system.  So to force someone to give them a receipt when they can easily get it... is harassment.

Now if he refused to open a bag.. then you call the cops.

B o n s t e r:

--- Quote from: n01_important on March 06, 2009, 12:20:05 PM ---To reiterate a previous point... Walmart can easily check the receipt on their system.  So to force someone to give them a receipt when they can easily get it... is harassment.

--- End quote ---

Not everything is RFID embedded, yet. 

Try again.   You can do it; not so sure about Mike.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version