HANLEY V. CITIZENS BANK OF MASSACHUSETTS 2001 WL 717106 (2001) CASE BRIEF

HANLEY V. CITIZENS BANK OF MASSACHUSETTS
2001 WL 717106 (2001)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Hanley (P), guard, instituted suit against Bank (D) ten years after he incurred injuries in a robbery. D moved to dismiss.
FACTS: On or about February 10, 1990, P was employed as a security guard by Metropolitan Security Service. Metropolitan assigned D to a branch of the Somerset Savings Bank. On the night of February 9, 1990, an alarm sounded at the Branch and the police responded by arriving on the scene at the bank. The police did not enter the bank since no one from the bank was present to allow the police to gain entry into the building. The next morning, P entered and robbers 'disarmed him, kicked him repeatedly, held a gun to his head and threatened to execute him.' The robbery was committed by the 'Hole-in-the-Roof Gang.' This gang has been known to rob numerous greater Boston banks by cutting a hole in the roof of the target bank at night, entering the bank and waiting for bank employees to arrive in the morning. In the morning, the gang forces the bank employees to open the vault at gun point. On or about March 17, 1997, the first jury trial of the 'Hole-in-the-Roof Gang' began in federal court. P first discovered that the Somerville police responded to an alarm at the Union Branch and could not enter the bank to inspect the interior because nobody from the bank responded to the alarm to enable the police to gain entry. P sued alleging that D was negligent in hiring, training, and supervising the bank personnel in charge of the security. D moved to dismiss.

ISSUE:


RULE OF LAW:


HOLDING AND DECISION:


LEGAL ANALYSIS:





Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com




© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner

No comments:

Post a Comment