Hanley v. Citizens Bank of Massachusetts

2001 WL 717106 (2001)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
H
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Hanley v. Citizens Bank of Massachusetts

Massachusetts Superior Court
2001 WL 717106 (2001)

Facts

James Hanley (plaintiff), a security guard employed by Metropolitan Security Service (MSS), filed suit against Citizens Bank of Massachusetts (Citizens) (defendant) ten years after he entered the bank one morning and was beaten and seriously injured by robbers who had surreptitiously gained entry to the bank the night before. The night before, an alarm sounded at the bank and the police responded. However, because a representative of the bank failed to arrive at the scene, the police were unable to gain entry to investigate. As Hanley entered the bank the following morning, the robbers disarmed him, kicked him repeatedly, and threatened to kill him. Subsequently, it was learned that the robbers were a part of the Hole-in-the-Roof Gang, thieves known to cut holes in the roof of a target bank during the night and wait for employees to arrive the next morning. Hanley first learned that the police had responded to the alarm but could not enter the branch without a bank representative when the gang was prosecuted for the crime in federal court. Hanley claimed the bank was negligent in the hiring, training, and supervision of personnel in charge of security who should have had someone arrive when the police were notified of the alarm. Citizens filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that it was barred by the statute of limitations.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Burnes, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 804,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Torts

Key Terms