905 F. Supp. 2d 617
D.N.J.2012Background
- Plaintiff Rohan Brijall sues Harrah’s Atlantic City and Camara for injuries from a fight on July 18, 2010.
- Camara, a Harrah’s security guard, allegedly restrained Brijall after they argued about Brijall smoking in a non-smoking area.
- Plaintiff alleges Camara stomped on his head and struck him with a fist or radio while he was on the ground.
- Harrah’s acknowledges Camara struck Brijall but contends the blows occurred after Brijall was restrained.
- Camara was suspended and terminated; Brijall filed suit December 28, 2010; Camara did not answer the complaint.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Negligent hiring | Harrah's knew or should have known Camara was unfit. | No evidence Camara was unfit or that Harrah's knew/should have known. | Granted in part; negligent hiring claim dismissed. |
| Negligent supervision | Harrah's failed to supervise Camara; video shows incident. | No foreseeability of injury; footage alone insufficient. | Granted in part; negligent supervision claim dismissed. |
| Negligent training | Plaintiff argues training was deficient; video shows outcome. | Plaintiff provided no policy details or expert testimony; hindsight video not enough. | Granted in part; negligent training claim dismissed. |
| Respondeat superior (assault and battery) | Camara’s assault occurred within the scope of employment. | Assault and battery are outside scope due to defensive/overly aggressive conduct. | Denied as to respondeat superior; genuine issue of material fact remains. |
Key Cases Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (Sup. Ct. 1986) (summary judgment standard and burden-shifting framework)
- Davis v. Devereux Found., 209 N.J. 269 (N.J. 2012) (negligent supervision and scope considerations for employer liability)
- Di Cosala v. Kay, 91 N.J. 159 (N.J. 1982) (elements of negligent hiring and proximate cause)
- Hill v. Yaskin, 75 N.J. 139 (N.J. 1977) (duty of care standard and policy-based analysis)
- Schisano v. Brickseal Refractory Co., 62 N.J. Super. 269 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1960) (scope of employment when protecting employer rules)
- Gibson v. Kennedy, 23 N.J. 150 (N.J. 1957) (scope of employment in employee discipline contexts)
- Mason v. Sportsman’s Pub, 305 N.J. Super. 482 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1997) (bouncer acting within scope when ejecting a patron led to fistfight)
- Cosgrove v. Lawrence, 214 N.J. Super. 670 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1986) (conduct within scope when motivated to serve master)