Knight v. Powers Dry Goods Co.

• Decision Date: 09 January 1948
• Docket Number: 34534.
• Citation: 30 N.W.2d 536,225 Minn. 280
• Parties: KNIGHT v. POWERS DRY GOODS CO., Inc.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

30 N.W.2d 536

225 Minn. 280

KNIGHT v. POWERS DRY GOODS CO., Inc.

No. 34534.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

January 9, 1948

Syllabus by the Court.

A Shoplifter, apprehended by detectives of defendant's store, while being escorted by them to the manager's office on an upper floor and waiting for an elevator to take them up, broke away, and as he ran down an aisle a customer was injured. Held, under the facts of this case, that no negligence was shown.

Appeal from District Court, Hennepin County; Albert H. Enersen Judge.

Maugridge S. Robb, of Minneapolis, for appellant.

Jayne & Chase, of Minneapolis, for respondent.

MAGNEY Justice.

Verdict for plaintiff. Defendant appeals from an order denying its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial.

Lyman Newlin is a bookstore operator in Minneapolis. Formerly he had been employed in a similar store in Chicago. On or about February 2, 1945, he saw one Vancil Ingall standing on a street corner. He was bareheaded and carrying with one finger a box 18 to 24 inches long and about 10 inches wide and high. Newlin recognized him, having seen him in the Chicago store and thought he was a book thief. The next day Ingall stepped into Newlin's store. He had his box with him. Newlin told his assistant to watch him, 'because he is a slick operator.' She watched him and 'made herself almost obnoxious to him, asking could she help him.' Ordinarily, prospective buyers are not pestered, the rule being that a man who buys books likes to browse. The assistant made it so uncomfortable for him that in about ten minutes he left. Newlin then called up every bookseller in the Twin Cities whom he knew, including defendant, the owner and operator of a large department store, giving them a description of the man.

'Q. Did you say as to his previous record? * * * A. Yes, I said I had known him, and I was now convinced he was a book thief because of this package.' Newlin did not tell them that Ingall was a vicious character and to proceed cautiously. He only told them he was a book thief, but did not advise anybody how to proceed further. When Newlin first met Ingall the latter represented himself to be a literary critic, and Newlin said he looked the part; that he was a 'big fellow, heavy set'; seemed to be well-bred and looked like an educated man; did not have the appearance of a thug or a criminal; and that when he was in the bookstore at Chicago he did not exhibit any violent propensities and treated Newlin as a perfect gentleman. Newlin came to the conclusion eventually, however, that Ingall was selling him books he had stolen. When he started to bring in high-priced medical dictionaries, Newlin told him to get out. He said that Ingall was 'peeved' about this and said he would see the president of the company, but that he did not do so. Newlin was asked, 'He didn't threaten to lick you?' and answered, 'No, he wasn't that type of man.'

The two women house detectives of defendant, one of whom was deputized by the city of Minneapolis, were notified that same day that there was a book thief in town. They had received such warnings several times before. No further information was given. Late in the afternoon they were called to the book department, and Ingall was there. Mrs. M. Louis Augur, the deputized detective, said that he looked like a rather distinguished businessman, and that she 'wanted to make sure we were watching the right party.' According to her, Ingall did not look like a vicious individual, but was a rather interesting looking person; he did not appear to be a violent sort, 'Far from it.' Another witness testified: 'He looked more like a retired minister to me than anything else.' One of the detectives remained inside, and the other went outside to watch him through the window. They saw him stack the books on the floor and then shove them into the opening of his trick box. It was like watching a sleight-of-hand performance. Then he went out the door. He was stopped on the sidewalk. Mrs. Augur said to him: 'Pardon me, sir, but don't you think you had better pay for those books?' He said, 'I guess I will' in a very gentle, soft voice. He turned around and calmly walked ahead of her through the door into the store, showing no violence or attempt to get away, and started to turn in to the book department. Every indication was that he was going back to that department to pay for the books. Mrs. Augur then took hold of his arm and said to him: 'There are too many people here. Let's go to the office, it will be less conspicuous.' They walked along the aisle toward the elevator. The other detective took hold of his other arm. According to Mrs. Augur, Ingall looked 'rather chagrined,' but walked along quietly to the front of the elevator. While they were waiting for the elevator, Ingall suddenly threw the box and started to run. That was the first indication that he was going to be violent and the detectives stated that they had no idea he was a vicious character. Some men employes were standing at a freight elevator near by. Mrs. Augur called out to them once to stop him. She did not call out again, and no one else did.

Mrs. Augur, one of plaintiff's witnesses, testified that as Ingall was running down an aisle plaintiff, 67 years old, ran toward him several steps, swinging a cane at him and trying to hit him. In order to get away and protect himself, he pushed her aside with his hand. She was the only obstacle in his way. 'She made herself a nuisance because she was right in everybody's way when we were trying to hold him.' She fell to the floor. She was taken to the coffee shop. While there, in the words of the witness, she 'was carrying on quite a lot about that a man like that should be stopped, and if there were more people stop them there wouldn't be so much crime; she was glad she had done it and she didn't care what had happened to her, but she just felt she did her duty as a citizen, and she was glad she had her cane that day because it was great help in an emergency like that. She seemed very elated.' She said she was glad she had stopped him. She was then taken to the nurse's office on the fourth floor. There she stated that 'there should be a big reward out for him, and she would be the one to get the reward, she would be entitled to it because she had stopped him, otherwise he would have gotten away and we wouldn't be able to apprehend him.'

Plaintiff testified: 'Just then I heard an awful noise, kind of a moaning, of a lot of women groaning and crying, so I went across the aisle there, * * *. So I was standing there and trying to find out about it, and all of a sudden this wild looking being, with his hair all disheveled, his necktie untied, was leaping on the ground this way, then he went over crossways, stood there, looked me right in the eye. * * * I was all alone. There wasn't a soul there. * * * He was kind of hiding. * * * He came along this way, leaping like a frog, jumping, jumping. When he got to the end he straightened up and went across. Right in that corner he looked at me, looked me right in the eye, and without a moment's warning he came right toward me, and I never budged from where I was standing; I never budged from that spot. * * * As he came...