TOP STORY
Negligent Hiring, Workplace Violence at Issue in Appeals Case
What constitutes discrimination wasn't the only issue at hand in a recent civil suit that pitted four black Texas men against Walgreen Co. in a Nevada courtroom. The lawyers for the plaintiffs also tried to prove that in addition to violating their clients' civil rights, the drug store chain was guilty of negligence in its hiring, retention and supervision of its employees.
During last month's trial, the jury took only 45 minutes to decide that Walgreens did not discriminate against the four Houston men during a visit to a Reno drug store in 2003.
At the close of the trial, District Court Judge Janet Berry said that the concept of discrimination is very subjective. The issue of when behavior becomes violent proved equally elusive and could receive more scrutiny when the plaintiffs file their planned appeal with the Nevada Supreme Court.
The four men who brought the suit against Walgreens claim that the store clerk, Richard Scott McCord, slammed a door, used a racial slur and walked off the job when the men complained about the quality of photographs developed at the store.
The appeal would challenge rulings by Judge Berry that prohibited information about McCord's temper from being entered into evidence. The plaintiffs' attorneys say that McCord's temper was especially relevant because it showed he had been in violation of Walgreens' policy against violence in the workplace, but was never reprimanded and was allowed to stay in a customer service position.
Walgreens' lawyers argued that the company's policy against workplace violence was irrelevant because no physical altercation occurred.
(Source: http://money.cnn.com)
| 
