Investigative Articles
"The one-stop site for Private Investigators,Detectives, Security Professionals
and Process Servers"
Click to enter
Index of Articles
- What do private investigators say are the most common signs of a cheating spouse?
- Private Investigators, Ethics and Morality: Do We Care What Someone Does With The Information We Gather?
- Hewlett-Packard, a Firm of Private Investigators and a Republican Gubernatorial Candidate: Strange Bedfellows Indeed.
- Investigators, when all else fails, don't panic: try the post office address check.
- What do Private Investigators actually do?
- Negligent hiring no respector of size or wealth of a company.
- Checking your Credit Report: What you should look for.
- What's in a name?
Business Contact Info
2812 Foothills Rd.
Cheyenne, WY 82009-4538
P: 1-307-638-9338
F: 1-307-638-9338
or via email.
Regulatory Info
License #OL-12-15320
City of Cheyenne, Wyoming
Bond #69884199
CNA SURETY
Tel: 800-331-6053
$10,000
NEGLIGENT HIRING LITIGATION NO RESPECTOR OF SIZE OR WEALTH OF A COMPANY.
© Anthony J. Sacco, Sr.
Recent developments in the laws of negligent hiring and negligent retention make the exercise of due diligence throughout the hiring process essential in order to avoid the financial and legal nightmares of a bad hiring decision.
At the very least, background checks of prospective employees to verify credentials such as past employment and college degrees — information provided on resumes — is a must.
Sometimes, even taking these steps will not protect a corporation from suit, although they will help prove lack of negligence. A recent case against Wal-Mart, in Columbia, SC is a perfect example.
Here, in May 2006, after five years of costly litigation,a jury cleared Wal-Mart of negligence in hiring a convicted sex offender who fondled a 10-year old girl while on the job. The girl's mother sued Wal-Mart in 2001, claiming the retail giant should have known Bobby Devon Randall was a convicted sex offender. The family sought 5 million dollars in connection with the September 2000 incident.
Wal-Mart's defense? That at the time, it was not legally required to do background checks, and that the employee who fondled the girl lied about his criminal past on his job application.
"What Randall did was indecent and not the right thing to do," Wal-Mart's lawyer argued. "But it's just a situation where Wal-Mart didn't do anything negligent that caused this to happen in their store."
The jury agreed in this case. But in a display of hindsight, the company decided in August 2004 that, to be on the safe side, it would begin conducting background checks on new hires at all its locations nationwide.