Question: 1 Do you agree with the court s ruling Explain 2 How

1. Do you agree with the court’s ruling? Explain.
2. How else might KFC have prevented this situation? Explain.
Harris placed his order with a cashier at a Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) restaurant in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, but hesitated in selecting his side orders that were part of the meal he had selected. Another KFC employee, Henry, told Harris to “hurry up.” Harris replied, “I am not dealing with you.” Henry then asked Harris: “Do you want the [expletive] chicken or not?” Taken aback, Harris further hesitated; Henry pulled out a gun. Harris put up his hands and asked if Henry was “going to shoot [him] over a bucket of chicken?” While another employee yelled at Henry, Harris tried to escape, but Henry followed and pistol-whipped Harris before he could leave the restaurant, causing him injuries. Harris sued KFC for negligently failing to conduct a criminal background check. In rejecting the claim, the federal district court noted that KFC was not legally required to conduct a criminal background check, and that Henry’s criminal history only would have revealed two prior convictions for nonviolent crimes over 5 years old.

View Solution:

Sale on SolutionInn
  • CreatedOctober 02, 2015
  • Files Included
Post your question