Summary
This Appellate Division, Second Department decision affirms a lower court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Walmart, Inc., dismissing the plaintiff's assault and battery and false imprisonment claims. The court held that Walmart established its prima facie entitlement to dismissal by demonstrating that the employee's alleged tortious conduct was motivated by wholly personal reasons and fell outside the scope of his employment under the doctrine of respondeat superior. The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Walmart is vicariously liable for the employee's assault and battery under respondeat superior when the conduct was for personal reasons and not within the scope of employment
- Whether summary judgment was proper to dismiss the assault and battery and false imprisonment claims
Holdings
- Walmart is not vicariously liable because the employee's conduct was not within the scope of employment and was undertaken for wholly personal reasons.
Key quotations
“"may be held vicariously liable for torts, including intentional torts, committed by employees acting within the scope of their employment"” (N/A)
Factual background
Romell Tyrell sued Walmart for assault and battery after an altercation at a Walmart store, alleging the employee Lenard Copelin acted within the scope of employment and that Walmart was vicariously liable under respondeat superior.
Procedural history
The Supreme Court, Dutchess County granted Walmart's motion for summary judgment dismissing the assault and battery claim and the false imprisonment claim. Tyrell appealed the order.