Legal Opinion
Oklahoma Gas and Electric Co. v. Pinkerton's Inc.
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided October 1, 1986No. 62558PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SUMMERS, Justice.
The question: Is a defendant who furnishes a security guard to protect the property of a landowner liable to the landowner for losses resulting from theft by the security guard while on the job? Our answer: Yes.
The facts are undisputed. OG & E contracted with Pinkerton’s for security guards for protection of its property at its Post Road facility. To carry out its part Pinkerton’s assigned its employee, one Rit-ter, to guard the property between 4:15 P.M. and midnight, six days a week. In November of 1981 Mr. Ritter was caught stealing copper wire belonging to OG & E and…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Keel v. Titan Construction Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1981
- Ada-Konawa Bridge Co. v. CargoSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932
- Lou-Con, Inc. v. Gulf Building Services, Inc.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1974
- Atlantic Richfield Co. v. State Ex Rel. Wildlife Conservation CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1983
- Cosden Oil & Gas Co. v. MossSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Specialty Beverages, L.L.C v. Pabst Brewing Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008
- MENG v. RAHIMISupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2022
- MENG v. RAHIMISupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2022
- Citgo Petroleum Corp. v. Ranger Enterprises, Inc.District Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 2009
- MENG v. RAHIMISupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2022
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.