Welton v. Georgia Power Co., 76806
| Decision Date | 25 October 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 76806,76806 |
| Citation | 189 Ga.App. 17,375 S.E.2d 108 |
| Parties | WELTON v. GEORGIA POWER COMPANY. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Osgood O. Williams, Irwin M. Ellerin, Atlanta, for appellant.
Robert L. Pennington, Thomas C. Taylor, Douglas D. Salyers, Atlanta, for appellee.
Welton appeals the grant of summary judgment to defendant Georgia Power Company in his suit to recover damages for false imprisonment, slander, and emotional distress when alleged agents of the company, Merritt and Hartley, caused him to be detained as a robbery suspect. The determination below and the argument on appeal focus solely on the false imprisonment claims.
Merritt, a City of Atlanta police officer, worked part-time for Georgia Power doing general security work. Hartley was a senior security investigator for the company. The trial court granted summary and final judgment to Georgia Power, having concluded as a matter of law that Merritt was acting pursuant to his authority as a police officer and was not at the time of or for the purpose of the detention acting within the scope of his duties for Georgia Power, and that Hartley did not "actively instigate or procure" Welton's detention, citing Baggett v. Nat. Bank & Trust Co., 174 Ga.App. 346, 330 S.E.2d 108 (1985).
Construing the evidence in favor of Welton, the circumstances giving rise to the suit were the following: Welton, a financial and marketing consultant, accompanied a client to a branch of the C & S National Bank located in the Georgia Power Building. Welton waited outside while the client transacted her business, shortly after eleven o'clock in the morning. Welton noticed Hartley who was standing with the uniformed Merritt, pointing in his direction.
Merritt was aware that in the past several months there had been robberies of three Georgia Power Company offices, a C & S National Bank, and other businesses by a man whose description and dress fit those of Welton. The robberies had taken place around noon in crowded areas near a MARTA station.
Merritt had seen photographs of the robbery suspect and Welton appeared to be identical. Hartley agreed. Merritt asked Hartley if he had photographs of the suspect and Hartley went to his car to get them.
Welton's client returned outside and departed, and Welton started walking south on Peachtree Street. Merritt decided to follow him. Welton had taken twenty or twenty-five steps towards a MARTA station when Merritt walked in front of Welton and said he wanted to speak with him. Welton cooperated and they went over to the side. Merritt asked Welton for some identification. He produced an out-of-state driver's license and offered additional identification. Merritt said that was not necessary and asked Welton about his residency and his business downtown. Welton asked Merritt why he had been stopped and Merritt answered that he was looking for someone downtown that looked like Welton. Merritt decided to let Welton go and Welton resumed his walk.
Shortly thereafter, Hartley brought Merritt the photographs and Merritt decided that Welton was the suspect and that he was going to stop him again. As Welton was about to enter the MARTA station, he heard his name called out. He turned around and saw Merritt and Hartley. Merritt told Welton that he had to detain him and take his portfolio, which they did. Hartley produced a photograph and told Welton to "take a look at yourself." Though Welton said he could see a likeness, he stated that it was not a picture of himself. Hartley continued to question Welton. Welton asked Hartley who he was, and Hartley stated he was an investigator. He denied that he worked for Georgia Power. Welton assumed he was a detective with the Atlanta Police Department.
Merritt told Welton that he had to call the robbery squad and have the detective come to speak to Welton. Merritt radioed the Atlanta Police Department to request that Hall, the robberies detective, come to the scene.
Hall arrived and Hartley showed him the picture. Hall asked Welton for identification and questioned him about any arrest record. Hall told Welton he would have to come to the police station. Hartley indicated that he would meet them there, that he was "going to get my witness." Hall and Merritt searched Welton, put him in the car, and took him to the station. On the way, Hall explained to Welton about the robberies and the positive identification from the photo.
At the station, Hall photographed Welton and several other men in the building to show to the witness from Georgia Power who had been brought to the station by Hartley. The witness stated that the person she saw was much shorter than Welton. Hall apologized to Welton and told him he was free to go.
As Welton was leaving, he heard Hartley say to Hall, "But you didn't take the picture with his sunglasses on." Hall responded,
1. Appellant contends that the fact that Merritt was an off-duty police officer when the "false imprisonment" occurred does not preclude recovery from Georgia Power because at the time Merritt was acting as an agent and employee of the company, providing security for it. It urges that Georgia Power's contention that Merritt was an independent contractor must fail.
Appellant relies on Colonial Stores v. Holt, 118 Ga.App. 826, 166 S.E.2d 30 (1968). While the case is not binding as precedent, the principles stated are sound: " ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ambling Mgmt. Co. v. Miller
...public duties, not at the direction of the private master, the master is not liable.”) (emphasis supplied); Welton v. Georgia Power Co., 189 Ga.App. 17, 19(1), 375 S.E.2d 108 (1988) ; Colonial Stores, Inc. v. Holt, 118 Ga.App. 826(2), 166 S.E.2d 30 (1968). As indicated in Hawkins, however, ......
-
Quinones v. Maier & Berkele, Inc., A89A0574
...to either of these causes of action. 2. As to appellee Maier & Berkele, however, a different result obtains. In Welton v. Ga. Power Co., 189 Ga.App. 17(1), 375 S.E.2d 108, we adopted the following legal principles: " ' "(a) servant may also be a special officer of the law, and the latter fa......
-
Watson v. Bradsher
...police, allowing them to make an independent determination of whether to investigate and arrest Plaintiffs. See Welton v. Ga. Power Co., 375 S.E.2d 108, 111 (Ga.Ct.App. 1988) (“The law draws a fine line of demarcation between cases where a party directly or indirectly urges a law enforcemen......
-
Corporate Property Investors v. Milon
...S.E.2d 809 (1993); Quinones v. Maier & Berkele, Inc., 192 Ga.App. 585, 589-590(2), 385 S.E.2d 719 (1989); Welton v. Ga. Power Co., 189 Ga.App. 17, 19-20(1), 375 S.E.2d 108 (1988). The defendants did not control the time, manner, or method of the officer's performance of her official duties;......