Connes V. Molalla Case Summary
CONNES VS MOLALLA TRANSPORT SYSTEM INC.
6/29/1992
Supreme Court of Colorado
831p.2d1316
FACTS Plaintiff Connes worked as a hotel clerk at a Holiday Inn and was sexually assaulted by Taylor who was employed as a long-haul truck driver by defendant Molalla Transport. Connes sued Molalla on the theory of negligent hiring in that Molalla should have known that Taylor would encounter members of the public and that Molalla breached its duty by failing to fully and adequately investigate Taylor’s criminal background. Defendants argued that it had no legal duty to the Plaintiff and alternatively that their investigation was reasonable under the circumstances. The trial court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgement on the ground that defendant had a policy against drivers’ use of public hotel accommodations and the other conditions of employment, and had no reason to foresee that Taylor would commit the sexual assault against plaintiff even if the defendant had known of Taylor’s …show more content…
After defendant checked Taylor’s driving record and contacted his references they had no reason to believe that Taylor would not be a safe driver. Additionally, the defendant specifically instructs its drivers to stay on the interstate and stop only for emergencies to service the truck and to eat and sleep. Drivers were to sleep in the truck’s sleeping compartment at rest areas or truck stops on the interstate. Defendant’s inquiry into Taylor’s driving record, and past employment information constituted reasonable care in making their hiring decision where the job duties involved minimum contact between the employee and other persons. Taylor’s actions involving his attack on plaintiff were outside the scope of his employment. Therefore, the defendant is not liable to the
6/29/1992
Supreme Court of Colorado
831p.2d1316
FACTS Plaintiff Connes worked as a hotel clerk at a Holiday Inn and was sexually assaulted by Taylor who was employed as a long-haul truck driver by defendant Molalla Transport. Connes sued Molalla on the theory of negligent hiring in that Molalla should have known that Taylor would encounter members of the public and that Molalla breached its duty by failing to fully and adequately investigate Taylor’s criminal background. Defendants argued that it had no legal duty to the Plaintiff and alternatively that their investigation was reasonable under the circumstances. The trial court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgement on the ground that defendant had a policy against drivers’ use of public hotel accommodations and the other conditions of employment, and had no reason to foresee that Taylor would commit the sexual assault against plaintiff even if the defendant had known of Taylor’s …show more content…
After defendant checked Taylor’s driving record and contacted his references they had no reason to believe that Taylor would not be a safe driver. Additionally, the defendant specifically instructs its drivers to stay on the interstate and stop only for emergencies to service the truck and to eat and sleep. Drivers were to sleep in the truck’s sleeping compartment at rest areas or truck stops on the interstate. Defendant’s inquiry into Taylor’s driving record, and past employment information constituted reasonable care in making their hiring decision where the job duties involved minimum contact between the employee and other persons. Taylor’s actions involving his attack on plaintiff were outside the scope of his employment. Therefore, the defendant is not liable to the