Zavala v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

691 F.3d 527 (3rd Cir. 2012)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Ps allege that they often worked at stores that were shut down at night and on weekends, during which time the exits were locked. Ps needed to seek out managers to open the doors. Managers were often unavailable and were sometimes not even in the store. Ps' deposition testimony shows that they could and sometimes did leave for breaks. Testimony also shows that they occasionally left for work-related tasks like retrieving propane (necessary for the buffing equipment). Ps also claimed emergency exists were concealed. Walmart (D) claims that managers were available to unlock doors 'when necessary'; that the stores had properly-marked emergency exits; and that - to the managers' knowledge - the emergency exits were neither concealed nor obstructed at any time and were always in proper working order. D also claims consent in that Ps returned to the stores over and over again and again even though alleging they were falsely imprisoned. Ps cited specific instances where they wanted to leave, but managers were unavailable or refused permission, no one showed them where the emergency exits were and D concealed the exists to prevent theft. The District Court held that Ps' false imprisonment claims failed on the merits because D had adequately demonstrated the availability of emergency exits and Ps failed to rebut this evidence. Ps appealed.