BLW 201 Study Guide - Final Guide: Tilford
26 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
CASE #4
Eddie Toma
Professor Staruck
Business Law 201
2 February 2016
Case 12-2
DENNEY vs REPPERT
Court of Appeals Kentucky, 1968
432 S.W.2d 647
FACTS: On or about June 12th or 13th, 1963, three armed men entered the First State Bank,
Eubank, Kentucky, and robbed over $30,000 from the bank. Later in the day they
were apprehended by State Policeman Garret Godby, Johnny Simms, and Tilford
Reppert. The information that led to the capture of the bank robbers were provided
by four bank employees. There was a $500 reward for the arrest of each robber,
equaling to $1,500.
ISSUE: Who is entitled to the money?
DECISION: Officer Reppert is entitled to the money.
REASON: The bank employees were not entitled to anything because they were acting within
the scope of their employment. Officer Godby and Simms were not entitled to
anything as well because it was their duty to apprehend the criminals. Officer
Repport is entitled to the money because he was the sheriff deputy of Rockcastle
County and the arrest took place in Pulaski County, thus, he was not in his
jurisdiction and was under no duty.
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
On or about june 12th or 13th, 1963, three armed men entered the first state bank, Eubank, kentucky, and robbed over ,000 from the bank. Later in the day they were apprehended by state policeman garret godby, johnny simms, and tilford. The information that led to the capture of the bank robbers were provided by four bank employees. There was a reward for the arrest of each robber, equaling to ,500. Decision: officer reppert is entitled to the money. Reason: the bank employees were not entitled to anything because they were acting within the scope of their employment. Officer godby and simms were not entitled to anything as well because it was their duty to apprehend the criminals. Repport is entitled to the money because he was the sheriff deputy of rockcastle. County and the arrest took place in pulaski county, thus, he was not in his jurisdiction and was under no duty.
