Flores

Flores v. Autozone West, Inc.

Good Law
161 Cal. App. 4th 373·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 420·74 Cal. Rptr. 3d 178
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 28, 2008G038322California5,292 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bedsworth, J.

This appeal stems from a summary judgment entered in favor of AutoZone West, Inc. AutoZone successfully asserted below that it could not be held liable for the damages caused by its employee’s physical assault of a customer at an AutoZone store after the customer had spoken to him in an arguably insulting manner. According to AutoZone, the employee’s conduct was outside the scope of his employment as a matter of law, because it “was not ‘fairly attributable to work-related events or conditions.’ ” We disagree. In our view, the evidence in this case supports the reasonable inference that the altercation was attributable to work-related events; hence the trial court’s decision to dispose of the case by summary judgment was improper.

However, we agree with the trial court’s conclusion the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to support Flores’s contention that his injuries were caused by AutoZone’s breach of an independent duty of care it owed in connection with the hiring, retention and training of Erwin Gomez. Stated plainly, an employer has no duty to investigate, let alone uncover, a prospective employee’s juvenile delinquency records, which are protected by law…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.