LUCAS v. BECKMAN COULTER, INC. Et Al., 348 Ga. App. 505

Plaintiff Claude Lucas was shot in the abdomen when defendant Beckman Coulter field-service engineer Jeremy Wilson accidentally discharged his personal handgun while on a service call at Lucas’s workplace.
Wilson transported the handgun in a company van in violation of BCI policy, retrieved it out of concern about vehicle break-ins, and attempted to clear it inside the client facility; the gun discharged, injuring both men.
BCI terminated Wilson for violating company policy and Lucas sued Wilson and BCI, asserting negligence by Wilson and vicarious liability (respondeat superior) and negligent supervision against BCI.
The trial court granted summary judgment for BCI, relying in part on statutory immunity under OCGA § 16-11-135; the Court of Appeals initially affirmed that immunity but reserved other claims.
The Georgia Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals on the immunity issue, holding the statute did not provide immunity in this case and remanded for consideration of Lucas’s respondeat superior and negligent supervision claims.
On remand, the Court of Appeals (adopting the Supreme Court’s judgment on immunity) affirmed summary judgment for BCI on both vicarious liability theories, holding Wilson’s acts were personal and BCI lacked notice of any propensity creating the risk posed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether BCI is immune from firearm-related tort liability under OCGA § 16-11-135	Lucas: statute does not bar his suit	BCI: statute provides immunity for firearm-related torts here	Court of Appeals adopts Georgia Supreme Court: statute does not provide immunity in this case (trial court erred on that ground)
Whether BCI is liable under respondeat superior for Wilson’s negligent handling of the gun	Lucas: Wilson was on a service call for BCI, so his conduct is attributable to BCI	BCI: Wilson’s bringing and handling of his personal handgun was personal, violative of company policy, and not in furtherance/scope of employment	Held for BCI: Wilson abandoned BCI’s business when acting for purely personal reasons; no vicarious liability
Whether BCI is liable for negligent hiring/retention or negligent supervision	Lucas: BCI knew or should have known Wilson kept a handgun in the company vehicle and thus posed a risk	BCI: No evidence Wilson previously behaved in a way that would predict this harm; isolated knowledge of handgun in vehicle (if any) did not put BCI on notice of taking it into client workplaces	Held for BCI: no evidence of tendencies or prior conduct that made the injury foreseeable; summary judgment proper

Piedmont Hosp. v. Palladino, 276 Ga. 612 (employee liability under respondeat superior depends on scope and furtherance of employment)
Munroe v. Universal Health Servs., 277 Ga. 861 (employer liable for negligent supervision only when it knew or should have known employee posed a foreseeable risk)
Lucas v. Beckman Coulter, Inc., 303 Ga. 261 (Georgia Supreme Court: OCGA § 16-11-135 (e) cannot be construed to provide immunity in this case)
Brownlee v. Winn-Dixie Atlanta, 240 Ga. App. 368 (acts disconnected from employment do not render employer liable under respondeat superior)
Cowart v. Widener, 287 Ga. 622 (standard of review for summary judgment on appeal)