Not Everything That Happens Can Be Blamed On Someone Else
Orlando Liability Attorney Paula Morrell recently obtained summary judgment on behalf our client in a negligent security case.
The matter arose from an alleged assault which occurred in the roadway behind a grocery store, next to the store’s loading dock. Before the assault, a truck driver, had backed a grocery store trailer into the store’s loading dock with the front of the truck partially in the roadway. Plaintiff was attempting to drive his car around the truck but was unable to maneuver around it. Plaintiff got out of his vehicle and an altercation occurred between the truck driver and Plaintiff.
Plaintiff argued that the grocery store was liable because the assailant was an employee or agent of the store. Plaintiff had testified that the truck driver was wearing a store uniform at the time of the assault. However, bodycam footage from the police showed the truck driver was wearing a t-shirt and basketball shorts – not a store uniform. Additionally, the truck driver’s employment records showed he was not employed by the store when the altercation took place, but rather an independent delivery company.
The store filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, arguing that there was no colorable evidence to support the position that the truck driver was an agent of the store. Further, even if the truck driver was an agent of the store, he was acting outside the scope of his employment when he assaulted Plaintiff. Additionally, the altercation took place on property managed by a landlord, not the grocery store.
The Court held that Plaintiff failed to put forth any evidence which established that the store employed the assailant, that the assailant was acting as an agent of the store, or that the incident occurred on the store’s premises. The Court found that to hold that the store breached a duty to Plaintiff in this case, the Court would have to extend the duty of a landowner to prevent criminal acts occurring outside its property, perpetrated by third persons parties over which the landowner has no control. There is simply no authority which imposes such a duty. Accordingly, the Court found the store was entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.
The store previously filed a PFS for $1,000 and will be entitled to attorney’s fees.
Our Rissman Victories Series showcases some of the most relevant and timely examples of our expertise and highly practiced approach. We consider the interests of our clients as paramount, and take pride in delivering consistent and meaningful results time and again.
