COBLYN V KENNEDY INC CASE BRIEF TRIAL
COCA held that the trial court correctly disposed of certain issues but declared other issues unfit for summary resolution. The trial court gave summary judgment to J.C. Penney invoked the provisions of 22 O.S.2001 §§ 1343, 1344, 3 whose joint effect is to create a statutory defense for merchants premised on a presumption of probable cause for the detention of a suspected shoplifter, and moved for summary disposition of the claim in its favor. Penney and its employees for his wrongful detention, resting the claim on multiple theories of liability. ¶ 3 Walters and his two children (collectively called Walters) brought an action against J.C. Even after it was determined he had in fact purchased the sweater, the police were not advised of this fact until after they had arrived at the store to arrest Walters. Although Walters offered to prove the sweater had been purchased at the store earlier in the week, they called the Oklahoma City Police Department and continued to detain him. He submits that shortly after they left the store and while they were in the mall, Emler and Anderson violently “grabbed” his hand and the back of his sweater, falsely identified themselves as police officers, accused him of shoplifting the sweater he was wearing, handcuffed him, and led him back through the mall to the J.C. Penney store in Quail Springs Mall in Oklahoma City. Walters alleges that on 23 December 2000 he had been shopping with his two minor children at the J.C. , on the suspicion that he had shoplifted a sweater from the store. ¶ 2 This controversy arose when Rodney James Walters was detained by Chris Emler and Steve Anderson, two employees of J.C. We hence vacate COCA's opinion, declare the issues that stand settled by the law of the case, reverse the summary judgment and remand the cause for further proceedings to be consistent with today's pronouncement. Although, like the Court of Civil Appeals, we reverse the trial court's disposition, today's resolution is effected by legal conclusions that differ from those reached by the appellate court's pronouncement.
¶ 1 The sole issue tendered on certiorari is whether the nisi prius court erred when it gave summary judgment to the defendants on the false imprisonment claim. Brokaw, Day, Edwards, Federman, Propester & Christensen, P.C., Oklahoma City, OK, for Appellees.1 Vaughn Conway, Oklahoma City, OK, for Appellants. Penney Company, Inc., Defendants/Appellees. Penney Company, Inc., and Steve Anderson, an employee of J.C. PENNEY COMPANY, INC., a Delaware corporation, Chris Emler, an employee of J.C. Rodney James WALTERS, individually and as parent and next of kin to Rodney James Walters, Jr., a minor, and Special Joy Bell, a minor, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v.
0 kommentar(er)
