Sophia Lynn Hernandez v. Ross Stores Inc.
Published: Aug. 26, 2003 | Result Date: Apr. 30, 2003 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: CV802114 Verdict – $1,000
Judge
Court
Santa Clara Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Facts
Plaintiff Sophia Hernandez was an 18-year-old cashier at a Ross store in San Jose. On Oct. 9, 2000, she was requested to accompany a loss prevention agent employed by defendant, Ross Stores Inc., to the manager's office where she was questioned about not charging a customer for a pair of shoes earlier that day. The plaintiff was also questioned about a cash shortage in her cash register several days earlier. According to the defendant, the plaintiff admitted to giving away the pair of shoes to a store customer because she was unable to get a price check. She denied, however, taking any money from her cash register. According to the plaintiff, the loss prevention agent then interrogated her for about three hours about the missing money. Afterwards, the loss prevention agent called the police, the plaintiff was arrested and criminal charges for theft and embezzlement were filed. The district attorney dismissed the charges. The plaintiff subsequently sued the defendant, alleging malicious prosecution, intentional infliction of emotional distress and false imprisonment.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff demanded $50,000. The defendant made an offer of $1,500 with an indication of raising the offer to $5,000.
Injuries
The plaintiff claimed non-economic damages for emotional distress.
Other Information
The defense counsel reported that the plaintiff dismissed her cause of action for malicious prosecution prior to the selection of the jury because there was no proof that her criminal prosecution for theft and embezzlement, which was later dismissed by the district attorney, resulted in a favorable termination. The records in the criminal case did not indicate that the criminal charges were dismissed for insufficient evidence. The defense counsel reported that at the close of each side's case, defense motion for directed verdict on the cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress was granted because there was no evidence presented of any outrageous conduct or any enduring and severe emotional distress. Also, defendant's motion to strike the exemplary damage claim in the complaint was granted because no clear and convincing evidence was presented showing that the defendant acted with malice, fraud or oppression in questioning the plaintiff. The only cause of action considered b the jury was the false imprisonment claim.
Deliberation
45 minutes
Poll
9-3 (Ross Stores acted unlawfully in detaining Hernandez), 12-0 (false imprisonment), 12-0 (damages)
Length
two days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390