Could Dunkin Cashier sue after Stabbing by Unhappy Customer?

What Do You Think?

Stabbing an employee may seem like an overreaction to finding out she is out of your favorite donut. In fact it’s hard to see how the event relates to the job at all. A case involving a cashier for Dunkin Donuts explains when assaults arise out of employment for purposes of worker’s compensation claims in Georgia.

The employee in that case told a man in the drive-through that the items he ordered were no longer available. He left the drive-through and came to the counter. He complained that she had been rude and demanded to talk to a manager. He kept complaining, and according to the cashier, put his fingers in her face.

The cashier told him not to do that, went around the counter to approach him, and said, "I don't play like that." At that point, the man pulled out a kitchen knife and stabbed her in the arm.

She sued her employer for premises liability.

A customer assault of an employee is treated as an accident covered by the worker’s compensation act so long as it is not directed against the employee for reasons personal to the employee. 

To determine if the assault occurred for reasons personal to the employee, courts ask whether the injuries: (1) arose out of and (2) in the course of employment. If these two conditions are met, the employee's tort claims are barred by the exclusive remedy provision of the WCA.

Was worker’s compensation the cashier’s sole remedy?

A. Yes. The stabbing only occurred because she was working at Dunkin’ Donuts.

B. No. This was not the type of risk one would expect to have working at Dunkin’ Donuts.

If you selected B, you agreed with the court in Peachtree Concessionaries, Inc.  v. Bryant, No. A25A1922 (Ga. Ct. App. 12/03/25), which barred the employee’s lawsuit.

An injury arises out of employment when it is connected with the employee’s  job duties. It does not arise out of employment, and hence is not subject to the exclusive remedy provision, if it comes from a danger the employee would have been equally exposed to outside of work.

Here, the assault arose out of the customer’s displeasure with the cashier’s job performance.

“There is no evidence that the attack was personal; indeed, the two had never met and did not otherwise know each other,” the court said. 

In fact, if the customer had not interacted with her in her capacity as a cashier at Dunkin' Donuts, she would not have been assaulted. It was the nature her job and the conditions under which she worked that caused the assault.

Accordingly, her claims were barred by the exclusive remedy provision and her only source of financial recovery was the WCA. 

Share This Article: