Hansen v. Texas Roadhouse, Inc.
827 N.W.2d 99
Wis. Ct. App.2012Background
- February 23, 2008, incident at Texas Roadhouse where Kropp intentionally placed hair in Hansen's steak; Kropp testified and was convicted for placing a foreign object in edible; Livermore and other managers failed to locate Hansen or address the incident promptly.
- Hansen amended complaint alleged negligent training, hiring, and supervision; vicarious liability; breach of implied warranty; and intentional disregard for Hansen's rights.
- Trial court granted partial summary judgment on negligent hiring and deferred punitive damages pending proof of intentional disregard; punitive damages were awarded by jury.
- Jury found Kropp contaminated the steak and that Texas Roadhouse was negligent in supervision but did not find causation between supervision and Kropp’s act; punitive damages were awarded.
- Trial court affirmed the verdict on implied warranty and entered judgment for compensatory and punitive damages; appellate court reversed and remanded, holding no underlying tort liability supported punitive damages.
- Cross-appeal by Hansen challenged the negligent hiring summary judgment and exclusion of Kropp’s background evidence; trial court’s use of 805.12(2) to imply liability was rejected.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Punitive damages without an underlying tort proven | Hansen argues implied negligence by management after notice supports punitive damages | Roadhouse argues no underlying tort liability, so punitive damages improper | Punitive damages reversed; no basis without causal negligence |
| Causation in negligent supervision | Hansen contends supervisory negligence caused Kropp’s conduct | Kropp’s act was not caused by Texas Roadhouse supervision | Reversal; no causation found linking management negligence to Kropp’s act |
| Implied theories via Wis. Stat. 805.12(2) | Jury verdict supports implicit negligence theory | Cannot imply a missing theory not submitted to the jury | Improper use of 805.12(2); cannot add unsubmitted cause of action |
| Negligent hiring claim and evidence of Kropp’s background | Evidence of Kropp’s background could show negligent hiring | Summary judgment proper due to lack of causal nexus; exclusion proper | Summary judgment on negligent hiring affirmed; background evidence exclusion upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 219 Wis. 2d 250 (Wis. 1998) (negligent hiring, training, or supervision requires causal nexus between employer's negligence and employee's act)
- Tews v. Marg, 246 Wis. 245 (Wis. 1944) (precludes using §805.12 to dispose of a case on an unpleaded theory)
- Lagerstrom v. Myrtle Werth Hosp.-Mayo Health Sys., 285 Wis. 2d 1 (Wis. 2005) (verdict form must cover material issues of ultimate fact plead and proved)
- Brown v. Maxey, 124 Wis. 2d 426 (Wis. 1985) (punitive damages availability limited to tort claims)
- Gulland v. Northern Coal & Dock Co., 147 Wis. 391 (Wis. 1911) (court cannot dispose of missing action not embraced in verdict)
- Autumn Grove Joint Venture v. Rachlin, 138 Wis. 2d 273 (Wis. 1987) (punitive damages and contract remedies limitations)
- Musa v. Jefferson Cnty. Bank, 2001 WI 2 (Wis. 2001) (punitive damages require other damages; no punitive damages without tort)