NewsLocal News

Actions

Judgment reversed in lawsuit over assault at South Salt Lake Burger King

Burger King
Posted
and last updated

SOUTH SALT LAKE, Utah — The Utah Court of Appeals has reversed the dismissal of a civil suit stemming from a 2019 assault at a South Salt Lake Burger King restaurant.

According to court documents, the suit was first filed January 2021 against H.B. Boys, LC, which owns and operates a number of restaurants in Utah, including the Burger King restaurant, located at 235 East 3300 South, where the assault took place back in February 2019. As this is a civil lawsuit, FOX 13 News is choosing to not identify the plaintiff.

One month prior to the physical altercation, the plaintiff, an African-American man living in Salt Lake City, had ordered a meal that included a hamburger, only to find that it was not cooked all the way through. He had approached the counter to ask for a new burger, or a refund, only for the shift supervisor at the restaurant to refuse and exhibit "an extreme, hostile attitude," according to the original complaint.

After the shift supervisor refused to give the refund, the plaintiff asked for the supervisor's name and a phone number to file a complaint. The shift supervisor refused to answer and walked away. When a different employee attempted to show the plaintiff the number they could call on a piece of paper, the supervisor walked back and aggressively grabbed it out of their hands, threatening to call the police.

On the day of the assault, the plaintiff returned to the Burger King restaurant with a relative in order to pick up food ahead of that year's Super Bowl. The plaintiff stayed in the car while the relative went inside to order.

The same shift supervisor, along with another person later identified as the supervisor's relative, confronted the plaintiff's relative, accusing them of being the plaintiff. Upon seeing how long it was taking to order, the plaintiff entered the restaurant to see what was going on.

Upon entering, the shift supervisor confronted the plaintiff, referring to him using a racial slur. The plaintiff immediately asked why the supervisor was using derogatory language, to which the supervisor threatened to have their relative assault him.

The supervisor's relative assaulted the plaintiff inside the restaurant, and then continued to beat him outside in the parking lot. The supervisor refused to call the police, even as the assault was in progress. The plaintiff eventually called the police, with South Salt Lake Police officers responding to the scene.
Court documents show that the supervisor's relative attempted to flee the scene, but was later chased down. They were then issued a citation for assault and would go on to plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge of Disorderly Conduct.

According to the lawsuit, the supervisor's relative told officers that the supervisor was "tired of all the homeless people coming into the Burger King," and assumed that the plaintiff and his relative were homeless because they were African-American. The lawsuit also states that the supervisor did not cooperate with officers, but was also not taken into custody.

The day after the assault, the plaintiff called the district manager for HB Boys to inform him of the incident. The supervisor was then fired two days later.

The plaintiff later sued HB Boys, arguing the company was liable for supervisor's behavior under the Utah Civil Rights Act, since the altercation happened while the supervisor was acting as an employee of the restaurant. HB Boys then filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing the plaintiff could not prove that the company discriminated against him nor that they were liable. The motion was then granted by the district court, dismissing the plaintiff's claims and prompting the appeal.

In an opinion filed Thursday, Judge David Mortensen writes that "genuine issues of material fact" should have prevented the court from granting the judgment.

"Neither express nor implied authority exists as [HB Boys] had clear policies, which Shift Supervisor was trained on multiple times, against discrimination and mistreatment of its customers," Mortensen writes.