Jacques v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 30 N.Y.2d 466 (1972)
Under New York General Business Law § 218, a retail merchant has a defense against false arrest and imprisonment claims if they detain a suspected shoplifter reasonably, and this defense extends to arrests outside the store and to the continued custody by the police, provided the initial detention was reasonable.
Summary
Jacques was stopped by a Sears security officer in the parking lot after leaving the store with unpaid merchandise. He admitted to taking the items and was detained until police arrived. Jacques was then arrested and taken to the police station, but the charges were later dismissed. Jacques sued Sears for false arrest. The jury found that Sears had detained Jacques for a reasonable time and with reasonable grounds, but still awarded damages. The Appellate Division dismissed the complaint, finding the verdict inconsistent with the jury’s finding of reasonable detention, holding that the merchant’s statutory defense extended to the police custody following a reasonable initial detention.
Facts
Jacques entered a Sears store to buy business supplies, placing 19 reflectorized letters/numbers (worth 10 cents each) in his pocket. He purchased other items (mailbox, keys), but not the letters. Sears security officer, Yarisco, observed Jacques placing the letters in his pocket and leaving without paying. Yarisco stopped Jacques in the parking lot and escorted him back to the security office. Jacques admitted to taking the letters without paying, expressed remorse, and offered to pay for them. Jacques had over $600 cash and a $400 check on his person at the time.
Procedural History
Jacques sued Sears for false arrest, false imprisonment, etc., in City Court of Syracuse. The jury returned a general verdict for Jacques, but also answered an interrogatory stating the detention by Sears was reasonable. The County Court reversed the City Court judgment and ordered a new trial, finding the general verdict inconsistent with the answer to the interrogatory. The Appellate Division modified the County Court order to dismiss the complaint.
Issue(s)
Whether the term “detention” in Section 218 of the General Business Law encompasses a formal arrest, thus providing a defense for a “reasonable” arrest in a shoplifting situation. Whether a merchant’s defense of reasonable detention extends to the subsequent custody of the suspect by the police.
Holding
Yes, because the words “arrest” and “detention” are often used interchangeably, and Section 218 of the General Business Law provides a defense for merchants in false arrest suits when the detention is reasonable. Yes, because the merchant’s defense for reasonable detention extends to turning over the suspect to the police under reasonable circumstances, implementing the policy of the statute.
Court’s Reasoning
The court reasoned that Section 218 of the General Business Law was enacted to protect merchants from false arrest suits, even if the criminal charges are eventually dismissed. The court stated: “Section 218 of the General Business Law makes reasonableness of arrest available to retail stores and their employees as a defense to civil false arrest suits”. The court also noted legislative history indicating the statute’s purpose was to reduce merchants’ reluctance to apprehend shoplifters due to vulnerability to false arrest suits. The court found the terms “arrest” and “detention” are often used synonymously, and “reasonable detention” includes a full-fledged arrest if there is sufficient cause. Here, the court found that the evidence overwhelmingly supported the finding of a reasonable detention, from the initial stop to the arrival of the police. Jacques admitted to taking the goods without paying, and offered no exculpatory explanation. Regarding the police custody, the court reasoned that Sears was justified in handing Jacques over to the police after the reasonable detention. The court stated that the merchant’s defense for reasonable detention extends “to the turning over of the suspect to the police under reasonable circumstances”.