Denney V Reppert

482 Words2 Pages
Elzbieta D’Angelo Chapter 12 Case Briefing #4: Denney v. Reppert Material Facts: The plaintiff Denney works at the First State Bank of Eubank, Kentucky, where a robbery had taken place. There was an award placed for the arrest of the bank robbers. The plaintiff, as well as 3 other coworkers, had supplied enough information to the police officer which had led to the arrest of the bank robbers. Two of the arresting officers were state policeman and the third officer involved was the defendant from the neighboring county. All 7 individuals, including the bank employees, and the 3 police officers claimed the award. Procedural History: The court established that only one police officer (the defendant) is entitled to the award. Points of View: The Bank employees believe that the information they provided to the police officers lead to the arrest of the bank robbers and that they were entitle to the award. The Police officers who arrested the bank robbers also believed that they were entitle to the award as well. In a publics’ eye, bank employees are highly ethical people who should protect the money, people, and businesses as well as the deposits in the bank. It is their responsibility to provide information to the law enforcement to protect the assets people have deposited in the bank. Police officers, when on duty, are obligated to protect the community and the people. The community in return gives them a praise and admiration for their courage and heroism. I agree with this statement as well. There is no doubt that I have special trust in people who work in banks and/or respect the police officers for the job they do. I think that they should not be entitled to the award for arresting the robbers because they were at work when it happened. Issue statement. What is Preexisting Obligations? Rules Under the common law, the law

More about Denney V Reppert

Open Document