Hello and thank you for the opportunity to assist you. Please remember that there might be a delay between your follow ups and my replies because I am typing out my answer, or taking a quick break.
I am sorry for your situation. At this point, you may
have a claim against Wal-Mart for negligence, which is a civil matter, not criminal. You can argue that Wal-Mart had the duty
to confirm the individuals' identity before taking the check, and them not having to do so (especially against their own regulations) was a breach of that duty. The traditional elements of a negligence case are: (1) A duty, or obligation, recognized by law, requiring the actor to conform to a certain standard of conduct, for the protection of others against unreasonable risks (2) A failure on his part to conform to the standard required ...(3) A reasonable close causal connection between the conduct and the resulting injury ... and (4) Actual loss or damage resulting to the interests of the other. Sutter v. Hutchings, 254 Ga. 194, 196-197, 327 S.E.2d 716 (1985) (quoting Prosser, Law of Torts, 4th ed., § 30 (1971)).
I would retain an attorney to possible sue them. O.C.G.A. § 51-12-5(a) allows punitive damages
if you show willful misconduct, malice, fraud, wantonness, oppression, or a conscious indifference on part of defendant.
I hope you found my answer helpful, and if so please do not forget to click ACCEPT
. This is the only way for me to get credit for my work – I receive no credit for my time with you unless you actually press ACCEPT
, even if you already have a subscription
. If you need more information, please use the REPLY
button and I’d be more than happy to answer to your satisfaction. There is no fee for follow up questions before or after accepting, if we continue the conversation. If you feel that I went an extra step to help you, a bonus in the form of another accept or an “add on” (available after you accept) is truly appreciated
. You can always link to my profile for another question at a later time: