#1, Once you purchased the item it was yours. They may have a right to demand to search bags of persons leaving store, but as for demanding a receipt, I don’t believe so. (I am not an Ohio lawyer)
#2, Should have shown the cop your DL. You turned a $50,000 damages case against the store into a questionable matter. Exercising a right is never the smart thing to do when it is the stupid thing to do. Ohio may have law requiring you to provide “identification document” to LEO on demand.
#3, In most states, when the manager hindered/physically prevented you leaving and told you you could not leave, he arrested you, whether or not word arrest was ever used. You had $50,000 false arrest case going for a while.
#4, Store’s rights probably changed (diminished) when you physically left the building.
#5, Get a Real OHIO lawyer, not FRadvice. Sue the store. Criminal matter will vanish overnight.
Most, if not all, states have laws allowing shopkeepers to detain suspected shoplifters. If you refuse to show a receipt for your "purchase" upon leaving the store, that is going to raise an inference of shoplifting. It's just simply not a false arrest.
MB, you gave some prudent information earlier in regards to contract law, business law, and common law issues recently.
Here is an issue I really don’t understand, and was wondering if you would guide me in the right direction.
The issue is Cramming/ Slamming as practiced by Cell Phone companies.
For example, I’m being charged for services I don’t nor have ever wanted nor have subscribed to any messaging on my cell phone, and am now routinely billed for it, and have to spend 30minutes to 3 hours monthly disputing the charges monthly ($2-$10/mo in charges for services I do not accept nor desire.)
This is about the 5th time over the past year I have to dispute the charges and each time the provider takes them off, but half the time it seems they creep back in. Now I’m being told I have to tell other people who call me NOT to message me so I won;t be charged, although my phone and service do not offer me that service (go figure).
Apparently, I’m not the only one in this predicament and frankly, it’s annoying. In order to dispute, I’m usually speaking with somebody on the other side of the globe who has been outsourced, which makes me feel even less secure. (Of course, who is more secure, the person conducting business in the US with other Americans not cognizant their info is spread out all over the planet, or working with the outsourced party recognizing all our private info is in the hands of third world vendors?)
This leads me to consider this entire thread. It seems that as we push towards more outsourcing, issues of common law to us as Americans, might not appear so common to third world cultures. Now when we are beleaguered by repetitive charges from out of the blue, we might refuse to pay, but also become susceptible to recourse by others we don’t consider legitimate, but are nonetheless forced to endure.
I guess my question regards all the outsourcing and contracting issues which in the past were considered handled by the UCC, and contained by US law, seem to becoming much more influenced by foreign interests, independent of US Law.
Have you seen or heard of any groups attempting to normalize these contracting basics between different cultures? It would be nice to at least have the education of say a 1st year college B-Law student to understand what risks might exist out there between different cultures blending into the US business climate under the guise of ‘outsourcing’.