David v. The Board of County Commissioners of Dona Ana County

April 28, 2014
David v. The Board of County Commissioners of Dona Ana County
In the case of David v. The Board of County Commissioners of Dona Ana County, the Mexico Supreme Court of Appeals held that when any employer chooses to provide an employment recommendation, the employer has a duty to not make negligent misrepresentation of current or past employee’s record when there is foreseeable potential risk of physical harm to the third party by the employee.
In this case Joseph Herrera, an employee at the detention center was accused of sexually harassing the female inmates. Herrera’s supervisor at MVH where he was employed, advise Herrera that they will taking actions to discipline him due to the complaints and Herrera resigns. Herrera asks his employers to give him a letter of recommendation for an employer he was applying for and the supervisors give him an outstanding recommendation. His supervisors neglect to tell the prospective employer, that at the time of his employment, he was under investigation for sexual harassment. Because they did not disclose that information they employed Herrera and he repeated his actions.
What was the legal issue in this case?
There are two legal issues in question in the case of David v. The Board of County Commissioners of Dona Ana County. The issues in question are whether the employers feel the need to talk, and the employers choosing to recommend employees owe any such duty of reasonable care depending on how it was said and what they said? If the employer does have such a duty of reasonable care, according to “Walsh, D. J. (2010),” the court must then decide if the employer owe a duty of care to the third parties and the prospective employer to whom the recommendation is given.
The supervisors of the detention center gave positive endorsements of the