This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Torts
False Imprisonment
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

Phyllis Ray and Jesse Ray v. Henry's Marketplace, John Erler and Sara Ortiz

Published: Nov. 13, 1999 | Result Date: Jun. 5, 1999 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 720891 –  $0

Judge

Vincent P. DiFiglia

Court

San Diego Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Thomas J. Castonguay


Defendant

Derek J. Emge


Facts

On June 1, 1997, plaintiff, a female, was shopping with her 11-year old son, co-plaintiff, at defendant, market, in El Cajon, California. Two defendant store employees saw the female plaintiff with a shopping basket containing body spray, hair conditioner and a large bottle of FAT BURNER vitamin pills. Shortly thereafter, plaintiff proceeded through the checkout line purchasing only a bottle of Snapple. The shopping basket was then found in the store containing the body spray and the hair conditioner, but not the FAT BURNERS. Defendant, male store employee, stopped plaintiff outside the store and asked whether plaintiff put the FAT BURNERS in her purse. Plaintiff denied taking the pills and went back into the store with the defendant, male, store employee. Female plaintiff showed defendant, male store employee that she had put the FAT BURNERS on the shelf in the soda pop aisle when she picked up the Snapple. There was a bottle of FAT BURNERS pills in the soda pop aisle next to the Snapple. Defendant, male store employee, took plaintiff, female, into the back office and called the police. An El Cajon officer arrived, Mirandized plaintiff, and then arrested her for petty theft of the FAT BURNERS. The DAÆs office pursued the petty theft prosecution against plaintiff for a short time before dismissing the charges for lack of evidence.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiff issued a C.C.P. º998 demand for $80,000, prior to trial. The defense countered with $2,500 C.C.P. º998 offer.

Damages

Plaintiff, adult female, asserted stress-related injuries, including $6,000 in chiropractic treatment. Co-plaintiff, son, asserted emotional distress.

Other Information

Evidence of the plaintiffsÆ special damages was excluded in limine for lack of expert opinion on causation. After the court granted defendantsÆ motions for nonsuit to all causes of action in son, co-plaintiffÆs complaint and as to some causes of action in adult, female, plaintiffÆs complaint, only the remaining causes of action for false imprisonment and intentional infliction of emotional disstress were submitted to the jury.

Deliberation

one hour

Poll

12-0

Length

three days


#97167

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390