Facts: Steve Romero was an off-duty police officer working as a security guard for Furr's Supermarkets. He assaulted a c

[answerhappygod]

Facts: Steve Romero was an off-duty police officer working as asecurity guard for Furr's Supermarkets. He assaulted a customer,Graciela Duran. When Duran brought suit against Furr's, the storefiled a motion for summary judgment on the grounds that it was notresponsible for Romero’s conduct because he was an independentcontractor. Duran argued that Furr’s had been negligent in hiringRomero. The trial court granted the motion for summaryjudgment.
Issues: Did the trial court properly grant Furr’s motion forsummary judgment? Is Duran entitled to a trial? Holding: Summaryjudgment for Furr’s Supermarkets reversed. When Furr hired Romero,it neither required him to complete a job application norinvestigated his background. Furr never even spoke with Romerobefore he began working at the store. If Furr had investigatedRomero, it would have learned that he had a prior complaint forusing vulgar and abusive language while on duty as a policeofficer. The appeals court remanded the case to the trial court todetermine whether knowledge of this abusive language episode wouldput a reasonable person on notice that Romero might assault a storepatron. Question: Was Romero an agent for Furr’s? Question: WasRomero a servant? Question: Then why would the store be liable forhis assault on Duran? Question: Was the store negligent? Question:What are the policy arguments in favor of holding the principalliable for the torts of an independent contractor if the principalwas negligent in hiring him? Question: What is the policy argumentagainst holding the principal liable for the torts of anindependent contractor if the principal was negligent in hiringhim? Question: I thought principals were only liable for thenegligent torts of their agents. Romero's tort was intentional.