Case 17.8 Brief

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 64
  • Published : May 31, 2011
Open Document
Text Preview
CASE BRIEF 17.8
CASE CITATION:
Gardner vs. Loomis Armored, Inc 913 P.2D (Wash. 1996)
Court Rendering Final Decision:

United States Supreme Court

Identification of Parties and Procedural Details:

Gardner is the Plaintiff and Loomis Armored Inc is the Defendant in the case

Discussion of the Facts:

Kevin Gardner was making a routine stop for cash along his route when he noticed a woman being harassed at gunpoint by another man. The company’s policy is to never leave your vehicle unattended at anytime. Mr. Gardner went to the aid of the woman, left his vehicle unattended to assist the woman, and was fired by Loomis Armored Inc for that reason. Mr. Gardner filed suit for wrongful termination in violation of public policy.

Statement and Discussion of the Legal Issues in Dispute:

The discussion in this case has to do with if Mr. Gardner’s helping a citizen in a time of need is was worth losing his job. Even though Loomis Armored Inc had a direct rule against leaving the vehicle unattended, he also has an obligation to society to help someone in a desperate need of possibly being seriously injured or losing his or her life.

Subject Court Final Decision:

Judgment was in favor of Mr. Gardner

Summary of This Final Court’s Reasoning:
The court’s ruled that upholding Public Policy cannot be a legitimate reason to fire Mr. Gardner under the circumstances. He fulfilled an obligation to society by helping a woman in need during a crisis. Business Impact of the Case:

The business impact of this case changed the way that Armored Car employees deal with situations in society. The companies probably have a system in place to make sure that someone always stays with the vehicle by adding more people to every money delivery drop and pick up.
tracking img