Robber's mom sueing Kroger

[actaeon277]

Respondeat superior

Respondeat superior, "When applied to physical torts, an employer/employee relationship must be established (meaning that no vicarious liability is established for work performed as an independent contractor) and the act must be committed within the scope of employment (i.e., substantially within time and geographical limits, job description and at least with partial intent to further employer's business). etc"

So, if carrying a gun is outside the scope of employment, why would a corporation be held responsible?
If someone does something stupid, and shoots a customer accidently, seems to me the individual would be the target of a lawsuit. Don't think it should be the corporation, unless it is part of his duties.
Of course, then people couldn't get their free money from the bad corporations.

 

[dwickstrom]

Open and shut case Kroger wins.

 

[Hookeye]

And deadguy's momma can pay for the Kroger attorneys

 

[cobber]

Maybe we should have a Letter writing campaign to Kroger's and let them know we support them and will continue to support them possibly in the Future...

Or that if they capitulate, we can always take our custom to another vendor?

 

[jmdavis984]

Sheepdog stops robbery, Kroger being sued

wxin - Mother of suspect killed in attempted Kroger robbery files lawsuit

There is no mention at all if Mr. Elliot held his IN LTCH. But it sounds like he was a prepared individual.

 

[netsecurity]

I think this is a duplicate. It is ridiculous to sue Kroger because an employee didn't follow their own discretionary policy. It is as if saying "Kroger policy is that the employees can't have guns, and my son was counting on that when he robbed them, so it is just not fair!"

 

[littletommy]

Hmmmm, first I've heard of it.

 

[Hohn]

The apparent argument is that it wasn't the BOY that was responsible for his death because of committing a criminal act, it was KROGER that was responsible for his death because it didn't adequately enforce a company policy preventing employees from exercising rights protected under state law.

 

[Hammerhead]

Yes, it's a dupe.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...defense/225134-robbers_mom_sueing_kroger.html

 

[Ted]

Respondeat superior, "When applied to physical torts, an employer/employee relationship must be established (meaning that no vicarious liability is established for work performed as an independent contractor) and the act must be committed within the scope of employment (i.e., substantially within time and geographical limits, job description and at least with partial intent to further employer's business). etc"

So, if carrying a gun is outside the scope of employment, why would a corporation be held responsible?
If someone does something stupid, and shoots a customer accidently, seems to me the individual would be the target of a lawsuit. Don't think it should be the corporation, unless it is part of his duties.
Of course, then people couldn't get their free money from the bad corporations.

Here is a more complete explanation: http://encyclo.findlaw.com/3400book.pdf

 

[jeremy]

Or that if they capitulate, we can always take our custom to another vendor?

No far using words, more than 3 syllables...

 

[youngda9]

No far using words, more than 3 syllables...

stack overflow error?

 

[bwrin]

thats ridculous...her son committed a crime and paid for it with his life, no way they should get sued because he made a bad decision

 

[actaeon277]

I'd love to hear the judge say, "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes."

 

[Ted]

I'd love to hear the judge say, "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes."

Does the judge also deliver beer?

 

[citizenkane]

I think this is why a lot of places post the " no guns allowed" and have policies about employees carrying firearms. They are all just afraid of being sued over stupid stuff like this. With a robbery the guy might have got a few hundred dollars. They will spend that on lawyer fees in an hour. They to start making the loser pay all legal fees in these rediculous lawsuits.

 

[Captain Bligh]

Open and shut case Kroger wins.

Well of course Kroger wins. But they point is that they will have to pay their lawyers more to show up to claim the win than they will to settle and make this go away. That is why we have frivolous lawsuits; they work.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Any judge who would entertain a trial for this suit should be thrown off the bench. On his/her head.

 

[KLB]

And deadguy's momma can pay for the Kroger attorneys

No. Make her lawyers pay. That would make them think a little before they brought suit for something.

 

[ATM]

There is no mention at all if Mr. Elliot held his IN LTCH. But it sounds like he was a prepared individual.

Yes, he is an LTCH holder and a great guy.