Preview

Connes V. Molalla Case Summary

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
474 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Connes V. Molalla Case Summary
CONNES VS MOLALLA TRANSPORT SYSTEM INC.
6/29/1992
Supreme Court of Colorado
831p.2d1316

FACTS Plaintiff Connes worked as a hotel clerk at a Holiday Inn and was sexually assaulted by Taylor who was employed as a long-haul truck driver by defendant Molalla Transport. Connes sued Molalla on the theory of negligent hiring in that Molalla should have known that Taylor would encounter members of the public and that Molalla breached its duty by failing to fully and adequately investigate Taylor’s criminal background. Defendants argued that it had no legal duty to the Plaintiff and alternatively that their investigation was reasonable under the circumstances. The trial court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgement on the ground that defendant had a policy against drivers’ use of public hotel accommodations and the other conditions of employment, and had no reason to foresee that Taylor would commit the sexual assault against plaintiff even if the defendant had known of Taylor’s
…show more content…
After defendant checked Taylor’s driving record and contacted his references they had no reason to believe that Taylor would not be a safe driver. Additionally, the defendant specifically instructs its drivers to stay on the interstate and stop only for emergencies to service the truck and to eat and sleep. Drivers were to sleep in the truck’s sleeping compartment at rest areas or truck stops on the interstate. Defendant’s inquiry into Taylor’s driving record, and past employment information constituted reasonable care in making their hiring decision where the job duties involved minimum contact between the employee and other persons. Taylor’s actions involving his attack on plaintiff were outside the scope of his employment. Therefore, the defendant is not liable to the

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    FACTS: Kevin Gardner (plaintiff) is a driver for Loomis Armored, Inc.(defendant), which supplies armored truck delivery services to numerous businesses that require secure transport of valuables. Loomis has adopted a policy for all drivers that their truck annot be left un attended. This policy is in the employee handbook and specifically states: Violations of this rule will be grounds for termination. During a scheduled stop, Mr. Gardner witnessed a woman being threatened with a knife by an obviously agitated man. Mr. Gardner left his truck unattended as we went to help the woman. The woman was saved and her assailant was apprehended. Mr. Gardner was fired by Loomis for violating the company policy of not leaving the truck unattended. Mr. Gardener sued for wrongful termination in violation of public policy. Judicial Opinion: The narrow public policy encouraging citizens to rescue persons from life threatening situations clearly evinces a fundamental societal interest….The value attached to such acts of heroism is plainly demonstrated by the fact that society has waived most criminal and tort penalties stemming from conduct necessarily committed in the course of saving a life. The court finds that Gardner’s discharge for leaving the truck and saving a woman from an imminent life threatening situation violates the public policy encouraging such heroic conduct. This holding does not create an affirmative legal duty requiring citizens to intervene in dangerous life threating situations. The adherence to public policy does nothing to invalidate Loomis’ work rule regarding drivers’ leaving the trucks. The holding to public policy merely forbids Loomis from firing Gardner when he broke the rule because he reasonably believed his intervention was necessary to save her life. By focusing on this narrow public policy of saving a human life, we continue to protect employers from…

    • 459 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    pa110 unit 3 assignment

    • 540 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Defendant had a duty to comply with all applicable state and federal regulations intended to ensure the safety of other drivers. Further, the defendant’s driver operated his vehicle in violation of 625 ILCS 5/ Illinois…

    • 540 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Law 531 Case 5.1

    • 1237 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Rules: The case was adjudicated on the basis of negligence law. Negligence is “the omission to do something which a reasonable man would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do.” Among others, negligence law takes into consideration: duty of care, breach of duty of care, injuries caused by defendant’s negligent act(s), and the likes. (Cheeseman, 2013). A particular negligence law considered during this case was negligence per se.…

    • 1237 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Business Law Case

    • 300 Words
    • 2 Pages

    FACTS: In the early morning of June 30, 2007, the Timmeran’s neighbor heard a woman screaming “stop it!” and “help me!” Around 7:00 am, the neighbor notified the police. Officer Mclelland asked Mrs. Timmeran to fill out a witness statement. In her three page statement, Mrs. Timmeran wrote that Mr. Timmeran repeatedly to hit her and force her to have intercourse. Another police officer asked her to submit to a sexual assault examination at the hospital. At the preliminary hearing, Mrs. Timmeran invoked her spousal privilege not to testify against her husband. The State then introduced into evidence Mrs. Timmeran’s previous statements to the police and to a sexual assault nurse. Mr. Timmeran subsequently filed a motion to quash the bindover. The district court denied the motion. Mr. Timmerman now appeals the district court’s denial of this motion.…

    • 300 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The plaintiff being the state represented by the District Attorney was right in their determination to hold somebody liable for these actions. Had there not been an…

    • 3050 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    You Decide

    • 694 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Susie, Jerry and Katie drove around for about a half an hour without taking Susie home. Jerry made one stop which was located down the street where Susie lived, but Susie never got off on the first stop. At some point, Jerry lost control of the vehicle while making a left turn resulting in the truck turning over and seriously injuring Susie. After the incident Susie filed a complaint against the City of Elsewhere, Officer Ruthless, and other defendants, alleging that the City and the Police were negligent and therefore liable for her injuries. The main issue is to prove if the City and Officer Ruthless are liable for Susie’s injuries, due to the simple fact that Officer Ruthless ordered Susie Marks to ride in Jerry’s camper because of the park curfew time.…

    • 694 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In the early morning hours of September 18, 1992, a police officer employed by defendant Town of Cheektowaga pulled over an automobile owned by plaintiff's decedent, Jacqueline Walsh. An acquaintance of Walsh was driving and she was a passenger. As the result of the traffic stop, the acquaintance was placed under arrest for driving while intoxicated. Based upon his observations of Walsh, the officer determined that Walsh was also intoxicated and unable to drive safely. The officer testified that he offered to call a cab or give Walsh a ride to any destination she chose, but Walsh…

    • 522 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Courtroom Observation Paper

    • 2729 Words
    • 11 Pages

    The Appellant’s lawyers filed this Motion for Summary Judgment asking the Court to dismiss the lawsuit filed by the Appellee based on the fact that there is evidence which shows that the “the defendant’s had no actual knowledge of visible intoxication” by Mr. Edward Hard, Mrs. Whites former fiancée. This would be the standard required in order for the plaintiff to recover under Indiana Law (Ind. Code Ann. § 7.1-5-10-15.5). Furthermore, they stated that the act of crashing into the White’s car was not the “proximate cause” of the injuries to the plaintiff and the death of her husband but rather the result of a criminal act by Mr. Hard. The defendants believe there are no disputes of the material facts in the case and ask that the Court grant their motion…

    • 2729 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    This lawsuit was originally filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court in 1999 with allegations that single-route FedEx Ground delivery drivers, Anthony Estrada, Jeffrey Morgan, Harvey Roberts among others, were incorrectly categorized as independent contractors with the company. The suit also alleged that the drivers were unfairly required to pay over a million dollars in out of pocket “operating expenses” to perform their job. Operating expenses for the drivers included all fuel, taxes, worker’s compensation insurance and regular maintenance of the delivery trucks as well as the cost of uniforms. Under the operating agreement, FedEx believed the drivers were independent contractors and not employees. The underlying issue of the case is that the FedEx drivers believed they should be properly classified as employees which would allow them to receive reimbursement for their expenses that FedEx would be required to provide.…

    • 411 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    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.…

    • 299 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the case District of Columbia ( DC ) vs Heller an officer for DC got declined for the permit to have a gun in his home for the year. After this he decided that this was unfair and took it to court. He pointed out that he was a police officer and he carries a firearm with him at all times for the protection of others and himself, but the court denied him the right to have a firearm for the protection of him and his family. The constitutional issue with this case is the fact that it’s how DC wanted gun owners to break down their guns, have a trigger lock on it, and keep the ammo away from the firearm even though the gun is broken down without the trigger lock.…

    • 1356 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Truck Accident In Texas

    • 373 Words
    • 2 Pages

    A family recently reached a settlement for injuries caused by a 2007 tractor trailer accident after seeking representation from a personal injury law firm in Texas. A family of three, injured in a Texas 18 wheeler truck accident near Chappel Hill, in Washington County, recently received a settlement of $435,000 after being represented by The Carlson Law Firm (Cause No 2011-CI-00049). The suit was filed in the 150th Judicial District Court of Bexar County, Texas. According to the Texas personal injury attorneys, the lawsuit stemmed from mounting medical costs endured by the family after their vehicle was struck from behind by a tractor trailer truck in April 2007. Approaching the intersection of U.S. 290 and FM 1155 at a high rate of speed, the driver of the tractor trailer truck, David Lynn House, was unable to come to a stop, smashing into the back of the family’s vehicle and propelling them into a car stopped ahead of them.…

    • 373 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    8. In Foster v. The Loft, why was a bar held liable of negligent hiring?…

    • 1180 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    | Dear Mr. Moore, After reviewing this case, I can state that Teddy’s Supplies is definitely liable for the workplace and sexual harassment against Virginia Pollard. According to the facts, it’s indicated that Ms. Pollard (plaintiff) was placed in a ‘hostile’ environment and Mr. Steve King was her supervisor. Although it is not illegal for 1 woman to work with a group of men, it should be carefully determined by the employer if the environment is suitable for males and females to work together. In this case, it was not a good idea for 1 woman to work with male associates. • Workplace environment can by justified by 7 ways: race, gender, national origin, religious, color, age and disability. In this case, Pollard was constantly being harassed by her male colleagues. They played pranks on her by locking her drawers shut, filling the guard shack with trash, locking her out of the guard shack and therefore she was not able to perform her job duty since she was responsible for watching warehouse inventory. Also, Ms. Pollard was put into unnecessary risk of harm when a coworker backed a forklift up to the guard shack and it backfire into her ear. Ms. Pollard could have sustained injuries if the forklift had hit her because it weighted 3 tons and it could have easily injured her eardrums because it is very loud.…

    • 2218 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    It is about whether the statute is constitutionally valid under the Dormant Commercial Clause (DCC). The State argues that all trucks must be equipped with certain types of protective devices to promote safety on the roads. The cost of the safety devices is approximately $1195 per truck. The Plaintiff, BBT, alone owns 89 trucks in its fleet. The regulation like this would impose a significant financial burden on the company like BBT as well as would put a hindrance on the trucking industry…

    • 1057 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays