Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Gortarez v. Smitty's Super Valu, Inc. Case Brief

Arizona Supreme Court1984Docket #1556581
680 P.2d 807 140 Ariz. 97 1984 Ariz. LEXIS 210 Torts Criminal Law Civil Procedure

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
3 min read

tl;dr: A store guard used a chokehold on a teenager suspected of stealing a 59-cent item. The court reversed a verdict for the store, holding that the “shopkeeper’s privilege” requires not just reasonable cause, but also a reasonable manner and purpose of detention.

Legal Significance: Establishes that the shopkeeper’s privilege is a three-part test: reasonable cause, proper purpose, and reasonable manner. Reasonable cause alone is not a complete defense to false imprisonment, and the use of force is highly restricted.

Gortarez v. Smitty's Super Valu, Inc. Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Ernest Gortarez, 16, and his cousin were in a Smitty’s store. Gortarez picked up a 59-cent vaporizer and asked a clerk if he could pay for it at the front of the store. The clerk, suspicious, followed them. When they left through an unattended checkout aisle, the clerk, not having seen them pay for or discard the item, concluded they had stolen it and alerted security guard Daniel Gibson. In the parking lot, Gibson, without asking any questions or requesting the cousins to stop, immediately seized and began searching the cousin. Outraged, Gortarez protested verbally, then ran around the car and pushed Gibson away. In response, Gibson placed Gortarez in a chokehold, causing injury. The vaporizer was subsequently found inside the store in a basket at the checkout stand where Gortarez had left it. Gortarez sued Smitty’s and Gibson for false imprisonment, false arrest, and assault and battery.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does the statutory shopkeeper’s privilege shield a merchant from liability for false imprisonment and assault when the detention, although based on reasonable cause, is conducted for an improper purpose or in an unreasonable manner involving immediate physical force?

No. The court held that all three elements of the shopkeeper’s privilege—reasonable Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat no

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does the statutory shopkeeper’s privilege shield a merchant from liability for false imprisonment and assault when the detention, although based on reasonable cause, is conducted for an improper purpose or in an unreasonable manner involving immediate physical force?

Conclusion

This case establishes the shopkeeper's privilege in Arizona as a qualified, three-part Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci

Legal Rule

Under Arizona's shopkeeper's privilege statute, A.R.S. § 13-1805, a merchant's agent may Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse

Legal Analysis

The Arizona Supreme Court clarified that the shopkeeper's privilege codified in A.R.S. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labo

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • Arizona’s shopkeeper’s privilege requires three elements: reasonable cause, a proper purpose
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?