S.C. Target Store in Libel Suit over $100 Bill

This article in Greenville Online is about a woman in Greer, S.C., who is in a libel and negligence suit with Target for $3.1 million after an employee in the store falsely accused her of attempting to use a counterfeit bill.

After Rita Cantrell was stopped in Target for her 1974 edition $100 bill, the Target employee who appraoched her sent out an e-mail to other businesses in several states, warning them to be on the lookout for Cantrell. Cantrell was later arrested at her workplace.

The information in the article is somewhat scattered. It starts with the inverted pyramid format, then loses its shape after the second graph, in which it tells what happened. The third graph is about the money that Cantrell is getting as a percentage of Target’s worth, and then the fourth goes back to the trial.

The information about the percentage of money relative to each sides’ worth is repeated again in graph 13: “Wilkin argued the jury…,” and summarized yet again in a quote in graph 16: “Wilkins argued that the award was a ‘mere fraction…’ “
Graph 17 might be a libel case in itself. It is a quote, although not a direct quote, by Cantrell’s lawyer which states that “Target failed to properly train and appropriately place its employees…”

Finally, the last sentence of the article is a quote, and one that needs a conclusion, or a reaction, or something to give it some closure: “‘Frankly, I’m surprised, your honor, that the punitive damage award wasn’t higher,’ he said.” I had to scroll, and was disappointed and unsatisfied when I realized that was the end.