Cather Gamble Case Summary

Discussion Questions Board A

A. Heather Gamble entered a Dollar General store to buy a shirt. Not finding one, she left and went to another store. She noticed a Dollar General employee (Sherry Thornton) has followed her by car, and parked blocking Gamble’s car. Gamble asked Thornton why she had followed her. Thornton asked Gamble what she had in her pants. Gamble found nothing in her pocket, but Thornton grabbed at Gamble’s panties from behind and tugged on them. Gamble realized Thornton was accusing her of shoplifting. Thornton left because it was clear that Gamble had not shoplifted. Gamble recited all this when she sued Dollar General for assault. Did she state adequate facts to raise the issue of whether there had been an assault? Explain your position.

Yes, Heather Gamble did adequately stated facts to raise the issue. She had been assaulted by the hands of Sherry Thornton, an employee of Dollar General. Ms. Thornton’s actions against Ms. Gamble was an intentional tort and caused by negligence. Thornton not only followed Gamble by car, she also blocked Gamble’s car in a parking lot that was not adjacent to Dollar General. Thornton’s questioning Gamble about the contents of her pants
Hawkeye Bank & Trust and affiliated banks agreed to refer bank customers to Financial Marketing Services, Inc. (FMS) for the purchase of life insurance Hawkeye and FMS shared the commissions. Hawkeye employees and some independent agents licensed through FMS made the actual sales; however, all insurance business was FMS’ property. Because of concern about the confidentiality of bank customer information, Hawkeye decided to terminate its contract with FMS and sell insurance directly to its customers. The independent agents claimed Hawkeye terminating the contract with FMS constituted intentional interference with the agents’ contracts and prospective relations. Was it? Explain your