That is absolutely what I am saying, Mr. Heap. It should be totally on me. Boeing is not responsible for my lawless actions. They would be responsible if I made a poor engineering decision, if I did something that affected the job I was sent there to do. But, if I went completely off the rails and beat the hell out of someone? No.

I realize of course that legal liability is far different than moral liability. In out litigious world, whoever has the deeper pockets is held legally liable. That doesn't mean they are.

We sit on juries, at least here in this country. We have the power to restore morality and personal responsibility over our current system of predatory litigation. I know I'm dreaming - just look at all of the folks who have responded on this very thread that, of course, Popeye's is "responsible". That concept has been so thoroughly beaten into us that far too many actually think it's true. I know that's what I'm up against when trying to present these topics for discussion - the dullards who are oh so quick to assign "blame", but are simply incapable of following a reasoned argument as to why they shouldn't. Unfortunately, they sit on juries, too. As such, we will never see the meaningful Tort reform we so desperately need.

The Supreme Court confirmed that the "close connection" test applied in previous cases was the right test. To apply the test to this case, it was necessary to first consider the nature of the employee's role which "must be addressed broadly". Secondly, the court must consider whether there is a sufficiently close connection between the employee's position and the wrongful act. The necessary connection could be found in cases where employees use or misuse their position of employment so that they injure the claimant.

In this case, the employee's job was to attend to customers, and whilst the assault was not within the scope of the employee's job, it happened in an unbroken series of events from when the claimant made a request of the employee. There was no "metaphoric removal of the uniform" just because the employee stepped out from behind the counter and by ordering the claimant to stay away from the employer's premises, he was appearing to act for his employer's business. Since the role of the employee was to serve customers, though he grossly abused his position, the employer was held vicariously responsible for the subsequent assault.

No doubt the Popeyes will be sued. And the legal gobbledygook you posted is pure poppycock in the world that "should be" and personal responsibility for your own actions. No doubt that thug will be sued, and he will never pay a cent, because he has nothing. The courts should order every single item of any value whatsoever he has be taken and sold at auction, and a judgement against all future tax refunds or government payments be levied. He needs to know that his actions have painful results and the real world is not a "wrestling match" like on TV.

We all know some insurance company will choke up a big settlement for the injured lady, and the thug will likely not even be charged with assault and battery causing great harm.

It ain't right, but that is what we have.

That is a Supreme Court ruling. If the employee is actng as the face of the business the business can be held liable.

That is why businesses have insurance.

mic drop.

The employee was charged with felony assault.

Let's see how much time he serves. Likely the charges will be dropped or just a slap on the wrist fine if this is first arrest.

Initially you said he wouldn't be charged. Abd he was.

No way. That was a vicious slam of an older woman.

Three to 15 years.

He will get some time.


"McElhaney said his client suffered nine fractures, including six cracked ribs and a broken knee. She had to undergo surgery, he said."

My time range is only based on Tennessee law for a Class C felony assault not by my seat of the pants shop-stool crystal ball.

https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-defense/state-felony-laws/tennessee-felony-class.htm

Even then, who knows given all of the powerful fringe components.

I understand, Bob.