1 Moreover, the trial court found “that Perlman did in fact slam or forcefully place the pricing sticker on the Plaintiff's shoulder, which constitute both an offensive and un-consented to touching.”Īs a result of that incident, plaintiff filed a four-count complaint in the Washington County Superior Court against defendants on December 6, 2002.
DaPonte as a way to demonstrate his concern that improperly placed price tags easily could be switched. In either instance, it is undisputed that defendant neither asked permission nor received consent to touch Ms. Conversely, defendant contended he could only affix such a small price tag with a thumb and forefinger and that placement of the price tag was more properly characterized as an inconsequential touching. On the one hand, plaintiff contended that defendant “slammed” the price tag on her shoulder with enough force to rock her back on her heels. Although the exact words exchanged and the tone of the encounter were the subject of dispute during a jury-waived trial, the parties agreed that Perlman removed a misplaced price tag from a rug and put it on plaintiff's shoulder without warning. Perlman was upset with the arrangement of the shoe display and also with the misplacement of a price tag on a rug. The plaintiff proceeded from the back of the store to the front to greet the president, and met him in an area between a shoe-table display and a rug display that was located near the front of the store. The plaintiff, an assistant manager with more than six years of experience working for the company, was the senior person on duty in North Kingstown that morning. “Walk the store” colloquially refers to a process that involves physically walking through the store with a member of high-level management for the purpose of receiving direct critique and evaluation of what is being done properly and what needs to be improved. At Ocean State, it is the responsibility of the senior on-duty person to greet and “walk the store” with Perlman whenever he arrives at a particular store.
On October 25, 2001, plaintiff was working at Ocean State's North Kingstown store, shortly before it opened to the public, when Perlman arrived. There are several Ocean State stores located throughout Rhode Island, and the chain is known for selling brand-name merchandise at discount prices. (Ocean State), which was cofounded by defendant, Marc Perlman, the corporation's current president and CEO. The plaintiff, Irene DaPonte, is a former employee of defendant, Ocean State Job Lot, Inc. For the reasons set forth in this opinion, we affirm the judgment of the Superior Court. After hearing the parties' arguments and considering the memoranda submitted, we are satisfied that cause has not been shown, and we proceed to decide this appeal without further briefing or argument. The matter came before us for oral argument on April 5, 2011, pursuant to an order directing the parties to appear and show cause why the issues raised in this appeal should not summarily be decided. The plaintiff timely appealed the judgment of the Superior Court to this Court. Even though she considered Perlman's actions to be highly inappropriate, the trial justice nonetheless dismissed the plaintiff's lawsuit for intrusion of privacy because she found it to be not actionable under the law. The plaintiff filed suit in the Superior Court under the provisions of G.L.1956 § 9–1–28.1(a)(1), alleging a violation of her right to privacy through an unreasonable intrusion on her physical solitude or seclusion. On October 25, 2001, the president of Ocean State Job Lot, Marc Perlman, entered one of the company's stores, and, after expressing his displeasure over the placement of a price sticker, forcefully attached the sticker to the shoulder of the plaintiff employee, Irene DaPonte. Present: SUTTELL, C.J., GOLDBERG, FLAHERTY, ROBINSON, and INDEGLIA, JJ.
0 kommentar(er)
