Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
- Homepage »
- Torts »
- Other Torts
28. Should the trial court allow the case to go to the jury?
The woman, after learning of the security officer's investigation, sued the company, asserting several tort claims.
After a woman left a company to start her own business, her former supervisor became convinced that she was breaching a noncompetition agreement that she had signed when she had begun employment with the company. At the supervisor's suggestion, the company assigned its security officer to investigate and provided the officer with information about the woman, including her telephone number. Unbeknownst to the company, the officer emailed the woman's phone service provider, pretending to be the woman, and obtained copies of her phone records, which showed that she had contacted several customers of the company after she left, in breach of the agreement. The records also revealed a number of phone calls by the woman to others, including medical providers.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
A is incorrect. The fact that the company did not expressly authorize the security officer's specific actions does not necessarily allow it to avoid liability. The security officer was an employee of the company, and the company both directed the officer to investigate the woman and provided the officer with her phone number. On this basis, a jury could reasonably hold the company liable based on the officer's actions.
B is incorrect. The woman's breach of the noncompetition agreement, if any, would not prevent a reasonable jury from concluding that the company is liable to the woman for intrusion upon seclusion. Whether the company has a cause of action against the woman for breach of the agreement is a separate question.
C is incorrect. There is no evidence here that the company or the security officer acted with an intent to cause the woman severe emotional distress, or recklessly with respect to that risk, or even that the woman suffered severe emotional distress.