Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Essay

640 Words Feb 25th, 2016 3 Pages
MEMORANDUM

RE: Intentional Infliction of emotional distress Relevant Facts

George worked for the Charlotte Bobcats based in Charlotte, NC. George has a contract that guarantees his employment with the Bobcats for a period of 5 years. Jerry, who is George’s boss, wants to get rid of him NOW. Jerry resolves to using tactics to make conditions with the Bobcats uncomfortable for George to entice him to quit. George eventually quits after Jerry turned off his air conditioner in mid-July and convinced others to not speak to George. Jerry also tapped George’s phone and played his personal conversations over the loud speaker. George sues Jerry for Intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Issue Presented

Under North
…show more content…
Watson was awarded damages against Dixon and Duke. Dixon and Duke appealed but the appeals court upheld the decision against Dixon but remanded for a determination for he damages against Duke. In Waddle v. Sparks, 100 N.C. App 129, (1990). Joann Waddle and Jacqueline Simpson sued Jack Sparks and Guilford Mills. Waddle and Simpson sued Sparks for the use of foul language, sexual innuendos and obscene gestures toward them and other employees. Waddle complained that the remarks Sparks made caused her intentional infliction of emotional distress. She reported the remarks to the Plant Manager and HR but Guilford Mills continued to employ Sparks. Waddle finally quit in 1987. Simpson sued Sparks but when giving testimony couldn’t provide any specific events to provide the allegations against Sparks. Simpson quit in 1986. Judge Lewis concurred and dissented felt that Waddle failed to prove intentional infliction of emotional distress based on her statements. He stated that she only proved that she cried once which showed any sense of distress.

Analysis

In our case, as in Watson v. Dixon, 130 N.C. App. 47 (1998), and Waddle v. Sparks, 100 N.C. App 129, (1990), one plaintiff was able to prove that she suffered intentional infliction of emotional distress based on her mental breakdown and in the other case, only crying was seen as any distress. In Watson v. Dixon, the court found in favor of Watson and awarded her damages. In Waddle v. Sparks, the

Related Documents