Hainz v. Shopko Stores, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, P.J.
This case interprets sec. 943.50(8), Stats., the statute immunizing merchants from such claims as false imprisonment for shoplifting detentions. Merchants are protected from liability, as long as they have probable cause to detain and as long as they detain only for a reasonable manner and a reasonable time. The issue here is whether “reasonable manner” means that a merchant has a duty to fully investigate each charge including the alleged shoplifter’s side of the story. We hold that the statute does not place that duty upon the merchant, and, therefore, the merchant in this case, Shopko…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- LePoidevin Ex Rel. Dye v. WilsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1983
- Collyer v. S. H. Kress & Co.California Supreme Court · 1936
- Lane v. CollinsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
- Lerner Shops of Nevada, Inc. v. MarinNevada Supreme Court · 1967
- JC Penney Co., Inc. v. CoxMississippi Supreme Court · 1963
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Miller v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1998
- NBZ, INC. v. PilarskiCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1994
- Peters v. Menard, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1999
- Commonwealth v. RogersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2011
- State v. VoneshCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1986
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.