Iowa Supreme Court Holds That Physical Injuries Are Unnecessary to Maintain Claims for Negligent Hiring, Supervision, or Retention
December, 2004
In Kiesau v. Bantz, 686 N.W.2d 164 (Iowa 2004), the Supreme Court of Iowa held that an injured party does not need to suffer a physical injury in order to bring a claim against its employer for negligent hiring, supervision, or retention. The Court also held that a county sheriff was not immune from punitive damage awards in claims for negligent hiring, supervision, or retention.
Facts
Defendant Tracey Bantz, a deputy sheriff for the Buchanan County Sheriff’s Department in Iowa, altered the photograph of plaintiff Crystal Kiesau, a fellow officer in the Department, to portray her in a sexually explicit manner. Bantz e-mailed and also showed the altered photograph to other individuals. When Kiesau discovered what Bantz had done, she sued him for invasion of privacy and defamation. She also sued Buchanan County and Sheriff Leonard Davis for negligent hiring, supervision, and retention.
All defendants moved for summary judgment. The trial court denied Bantz’s motion but granted summary judgment for the County and Sheriff Davis. The court held that because Kiesau had not sustained physical injury, she could not bring claims for negligent hiring, supervision, or retention against the County or Davis. The court further held that when looking at the parties’ respective arguments in a light most favorable to Kiesau, she was not entitled to punitive damages against Davis as a matter of law.
At trial, the jury awarded Kiesau compensatory damages for defamation and invasion of privacy in the amount of $96,000 and $60,000 in punitive damages. Both Kiesau and Bantz appealed. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the judgment against Bantz stating that the trial court correctly instructed the jury, and that the substantial weight of the evidence supported the verdict against Bantz on the issues of defamation, compensatory damages, and punitive damages.
Kiesau argued on appeal that her claims for negligent hiring, supervision, or retention could stand without a showing of physical injury. She also contended that a genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether she could be awarded punitive damages against Davis for negligent hiring, supervision, or retention.
Analysis
Physical Injury Not Required
The trial court dismissed Kiesau’s negligent hiring, supervision, and retention claims based on Graves v. Iowa Lakes Community College, 639 N.W.2d 22 (Iowa 2002), which held that such claims could not be maintained absent resulting physical injuries. Kiesau asked the Iowa Supreme Court to overrule Graves on this point.
The Court first noted that claims of negligent hiring, supervision, or retention permit a plaintiff to recover damages against his or her employer when a co-employee’s tortious conduct is outside the scope of employment, due to the fact that the employer’s conduct in some way facilitated the wrongful acts on the part of the co-employee. Island City Flying Serv. v. Gen. Elec. Credit Corp., 585 So.2d 274, 278 (Fla. 1991). The Court also cited its holding in Schoff v. Combined Ins. Co. of America, 604 N.W.2d 43 (Iowa 1999), that a wrongful act must be committed by a co-employee for plaintiff to maintain a claim for negligent hiring, supervision, or retention against its employer. As such, plaintiff had to prove that the wrongful act of the co-employee caused a compensable injury, in addition to showing that the negligent hiring, supervision, or retention by the employer of the tortfeasor employee caused the injuries.
Surprisingly, the Iowa Supreme Court admitted that it apparently did not consider its holding in Schoff when it decided Graves (negligent supervision claim dismissed because plaintiff failed to assert physical injuries) since requiring a physical injury was inconsistent with the expansive description of the required conduct of the tortfeasor employee set forth in Schoff. Therefore, the Court decided to re-examine Graves with respect to the physical injury requirement.
The Court observed that Section 213 of the Restatement (Second) of Agency does not require that an injured litigant must suffer a physical injury in order to recover damages based on negligent hiring, supervision, or retention. The Court also looked to several federal cases applying Texas, Kentucky, and Tennessee law which essentially held that physical injuries were not a prerequisite for recovery of damages based on torts of negligent hiring, supervision, or retention. The Court further stated that application of Graves could lead to illogical and absurd results. For example, if an employer’s negligent hiring, supervision, or retention led to an employee committing battery against one individual, but merely assault against another, only the battered individual could recover damages against the employer under the theories of negligent hiring, supervision, or retention.
The Supreme Court concluded that the trial court erred in granting Buchanan County’s and Davis’s motions for summary judgment on the grounds that Kiesau did not suffer a physical injury. In doing so, the Court overruled its previous decision in Graves that a claim of negligent hiring, supervision, or retention requires a resulting physical injury.
Punitive Damages Available Against Sheriff
Although Buchanan County was immune from punitive damages under Iowa statutory law, Davis had no such immunity if it could be shown that in the course of his work duties, he engaged in conduct which was malicious, or willful, wanton, and reckless. Iowa Code § 670.12.
Here, the Supreme Court noted that the record was clear that Davis had become aware of Bantz’s behavior on numerous prior occasions from various high ranking officials in his department. However, despite this awareness, Davis never took any meaningful disciplinary measures against Bantz. The Court felt that this could have facilitated Bantz’s tortious conduct against Kiesau. As such, the Court held that a genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether Davis engaged in willful, wanton, or reckless misconduct by not disciplining Bantz after he became aware of his problematic behavior. The Court accordingly reversed the award of summary judgment for the County and Davis on plaintiff’s punitive damages claims.
Learning Points:
Since physical injuries are no longer required in order to bring claims of negligent hiring, supervision, or retention, it will be easier for employees in Iowa to maintain such lawsuits. Furthermore, high ranking officials in Iowa municipalities, such as sheriffs, are not immune from punitive damage awards if it can be shown that they acted with malice, or willful, wanton and reckless conduct, in the course of their work duties. As Kiesau makes clear, employers in Iowa must be increasingly vigilant with respect to the actions and conduct of their employees, or the consequences can be severe.
Back to CM Report of Recent Decisions (2004v4) 2004 Volume 4 Table of Contents
