Wife's nude pics on lost phone end up online

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by Kevin

It's a gratuitous bailment/publication of private facts case. Usually in these things, there are some damages. Unless the man's wife is a notorious slut, he's probably entitled to something, as is the wife. Now $3 million??? I don't know anything about the Arkansas pleading code, but that could very well be a threshold amount to get on a certain docket or just a ploy to make the defense lawyers to consider a quick and private settlement... who knows which?

The legal test here is pretty easily met. What you have here is a gratuitous bailment, solely for the benefit of the bailor. The duty of care here would be that the bailee not be grossly negligent. The bailee here, as far as I can tell was not just grossly negligent, but wilfully negligent (I mean the McDonald's employee didn't just accidently brush the phone with his elbow causing the photos to be posted online)... the pictures apparently harmed their reputations, God knows what else.

This is a pretty easy verdict for the plaintiff. Probably not for $3 million, but who knows what might happen with a Fayetville jury?

Dude, I don't know. If you leave your cell phone with nude pictures of your wife at a McDonald's, I think you've been pretty negligent yourself.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Dude, I don't know. If you leave your cell phone with nude pictures of your wife at a McDonald's, I think you've been pretty negligent.

As soon as McDonald's promised to hold onto the phone, all of that went right out the window. The safety of the phone and its contents became McDonald's responsibility.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by Kevin

As soon as McDonald's promised to hold onto the phone, all of that went right out the window. The safety of the phone and its contents became McDonald's responsibility.

And can you really say that images from an unlocked cell phone left at a McDonald's are actually private anymore? What's his obligation in keeping his own facts private?

ETA: Do any of the news stories deal with how long the phone was at the McDonald's before the manager called?

EATA: I may regret saying this, but I'm going to record my suspicion that the husband and wife in this deal may end up being more responsible than it first appears. I'm just kind of suspicious of the claims.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

And can you really say that images from an unlocked cell phone left at a McDonald's are actually private anymore? What's his obligation in keeping his own facts private?

If I leave my door unlocked, you're not allowed to simply walk in and take what you want. Similarly, if I leave my wallet on a table, you're not allowed to simply take the contents, either.

This was obviously a poor move on the guy's part, but that really doesn't excuse any subsequent actions.

[Tinia2]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Dude, I don't know. If you leave your cell phone with nude pictures of your wife at a McDonald's, I think you've been pretty negligent yourself. And can you really say that images from an unlocked cell phone left at a McDonald's are actually private anymore? What's his obligation in keeping his own facts private?

ETA: Do any of the news stories deal with how long the phone was at the McDonald's before the manager called?

Originally Posted by Kevin

As soon as McDonald's promised to hold onto the phone, all of that went right out the window. The safety of the phone and its contents became McDonald's responsibility.

I had the very same thought you did UGAalum94.
The only comment I have seen was in one of the links I posted above:
"and he left his cell phone at the fast food restaurant while leaving. The store manager assured him that the phone would be kept safe for his retrieval when he called to locate it, but almost immediately, the photos that she had sent to his phone were uploaded onto a website where users discovered her identity, address, and phone number."

So the question(s) would be:
What happened between the time the Sherman's' lost care, custody, and control of the phone and when the store manager took control of the phone and secured it. And how did he secure it.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by Tinia2

I had the very same thought you did UGAalum94.
The only comment I have seen was in one of the links I posted above:
"and he left his cell phone at the fast food restaurant while leaving. The store manager assured him that the phone would be kept safe for his retrieval when he called to locate it, but almost immediately, the photos that she had sent to his phone were uploaded onto a website where users discovered her identity, address, and phone number."

So the question(s) would be:
What happened between the time the Sherman's' left and when the store manager took control of the phone and secured it. And how did he secure it.

Yep, and one of the story says that on the website where the pictures were uploaded that employees admitted to doing it. On the one hand, maybe they are the stupidest employees in the world. On the other, if you wanted three million dollars. . .

ETA: maybe this McDonald's is the most boring place in the world to work, but who takes the time to scroll though images on random cell phones? I guess we'll see if it goes to court.

[Kevin]

What's cloudy? I don't see how any of those facts do anything to mitigate the manager's responsibility. If an employee stole the phone and put the pictures on the internet, then that's the manager's fault for not securing the phone somehow. Like I said, I'm sure there's a safe or a locking desk drawer somewhere on the premises.

[Tinia2]

Originally Posted by Kevin

What's cloudy? I don't see how any of those facts do anything to mitigate the manager's responsibility. If an employee stole the phone and put the pictures on the internet, then that's the manager's fault for not securing the phone somehow. Like I said, I'm sure there's a safe or a locking desk drawer somewhere on the premises.

Well:
Was it the Manager himself?
Was it an employee a)before the manager got hold of it?
b) after the manager got hold of it?
Was it another customer?
Was it the Shermans' themselves?

I think we all have seen delays in data transfers, up loads and downloads. I have received voice mail messages the next day.
CSI geeks will be looking at logs in order to get a time line.

As for a safe, I know the retail store I worked at years ago had one.
And that is where we put things like credit cards that were found.
Now thinking about that, management would have no control what happened to cards prior to getting them.

[Kevin]

Again, nothing there to help McDonald's. We know the pictures were uploaded by an employee, so when that happened is not really material.

It's a good lawsuit. The plaintiffs are more than likely entitled to something here.

[Tinia2]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Again, nothing there to help McDonald's. We know the pictures were uploaded by an employee, so when that happened is not really material.

It's a good lawsuit. The plaintiffs are more than likely entitled to something here.

Do we know?? All we know is what was claimed on a web site as reported in a blog. I have yet to see the original and from what I have seen, it is gone from public view.
All options are open for investigation by the authorities, claimant's and defendants.
And yes, given my families background in P&C insurance and law, I agree with you. They most likely will get something out of this. And if it is by way of trial, it maybe followed by years of appeals (remember the coffee case?).
Or perhaps an out of court settlement.
However, are they entitled to something? ???????

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Tinia2

However, are they entitled to something? ???????

If the facts given are true, then yes, probably.

Let me just put it this way -- if a client came into my office (and I actually did intake interviews, which I don't) and gave me these facts, I would, without hesitation, agree to take the case.

[AGDee]

I would think the difficulty would be in determining who had access to the phone before the employees found it. If someone left their phone on a table in a fast food restaurant, anybody could have gotten a hold of it.

[Kevin]

As KSig pointed out, that's a moralistic argument [one I disagree with], not a legal one. The issue here is bailment --was there one when the pictures were uploaded to the internet? (google the word if you don't know what it is).

If there was bailment, there is going to be liability (assuming there are no other mitigating facts). It's really not a tough issue.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by Kevin

As KSig pointed out, that's a moralistic argument [one I disagree with], not a legal one. The issue here is bailment --was there one when the pictures were uploaded to the internet? (google the word if you don't know what it is).

If there was bailment, there is going to be liability (assuming there are no other mitigating facts). It's really not a tough issue.

Did I seem to be trying to making a legal argument?

ETA: I think that I've been trying to say what I think ought to be true, rather than making any claims about what legal is true.

[DrPhil]

Well, this sucks...idiots need to keep compromising photos off of cellphones, email, etc.

DUHHHHHHHH.....