October 4, 2006


Eleventh Circuit: “McDonald’s not liable in strip-search lawsuit”

Filed under: Appellate Law/Practice, Eleventh Circuit, Pryor
By Steve Dillard (Email) @ 4:01 pm

Well, that was a quick ruling.


Nobody Has Trackbacked Yet

The trackback URL for this post: http://www.southernappeal.org/index.php/archives/1798/trackback

5 Rebel Yells to “Eleventh Circuit: “McDonald’s not liable in strip-search lawsuit””

  1. quasimodo Says:
    October 4th, 2006 at 4:23 pm

    I missed this one …. so let me make sure I have this right:

    A person phones in claiming to be a cop; he tells an employee to perform a cavity search on another employee …. and He did it?

    I guess they did not cover common sense in school. wow

  2. John in Nashville Says:
    October 4th, 2006 at 4:23 pm

    Is there a link to the District Court opinion? I wonder what the basis for federal jurisdiction is, unless it is diversity of citizenship.

  3. sfclerk Says:
    October 4th, 2006 at 4:36 pm

    Without having read the opinion or the complaint, I would think it must be a Title VII case.

  4. Verity Says:
    October 4th, 2006 at 5:44 pm

    The case against McDonald’s was based on negligence, but Vanessa Catalano also sued the franchise holder, most likely under Title VII, so jurisdiction could be either based on diversity or if pendent to the Title VII claim.

  5. JohnInMontgomery Says:
    October 5th, 2006 at 1:53 am

    Great commentary by Judge Pryor. I think we’ll see him on the Supremes in a few years. The guy is brilliant.

Powered by WordPress