Remove 2022 Remove Cause of Action Remove Litigating Remove Tort
article thumbnail

No cause of action against employers for take-home COVID

At the Lectern

” “[E]xclusivity provisions bar a third party claim only when proof of an employee’s injury is required as an element of the cause of action,” the court says. 2022) 601 F.Supp.3d They lose because the court finds public policy reasons override factors that otherwise would establish a duty of care for employers.

article thumbnail

Reckless infliction of emotional distress plaintiffs was not within the reasonably foreseeable scope of the alleged tort.

Day on Torts

E2020-00688-COA-R10-CV, 2022 WL 1042733 (Tenn. April 7, 2022), plaintiff was the school secretary at an elementary school, and defendant was the employer of school bus drivers for that school. E2020-00755-COA-R10-CV (April 7, 2022) and Schrick v. E2020-00796-COA-R10-CV (April 7, 2022)). In Bibbs v.

Tort 52
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

Spooky Torts: The 2022 List of Litigation Horrors

JonathanTurley

Here is my annual list of Halloween torts and crimes. Halloween has everything for a torts-filled holiday: battery, trespass, defamation, nuisance, product liability and more. However, my students and I often discuss the remarkably wide range of torts that comes with All Hallow’s Eve.

Tort 37
article thumbnail

Australian Federal Court dismisses the novel duty of care previously found in Sharma: what does it mean for future climate litigation in Australia?

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

On March 15, 2022, the Full Federal Court of Australia, an intermediate appellate court, unanimously overturned the primary judge’s decision in Sharma and Others v. The decision has significant implications for future climate litigation claims in Australia. Sharma and Others and its impact for climate litigation in Australia.

article thumbnail

County not immune from suit where sheriff’s deputy failed to investigate death threats.

Day on Torts

M2020-01448-COA-R3-CV, 2022 WL 1210462 (Tenn. April 25, 2022), plaintiff was shot multiple times by her estranged husband in August 2018. This opinion is an important read for anyone litigating this issue, especially if the case pertains to decisions made by law enforcement officers. In Haynes v. Perry County, Tennessee , No.

Tort 59
article thumbnail

Anti-enforcement injunction granted by the New Zealand court

Conflict of Laws

For litigants embroiled in cross-border litigation, the anti-suit injunction has become a staple in the conflict of laws arsenal of common law courts. This was the scenario facing the New Zealand High Court in the recent case of Kea Investments Ltd v Wikeley Family Trustee Limited [2022] NZHC 2881.

Court 52
article thumbnail

Supreme Court Rejects Cause of Action Under Bivens Against Border Patrol Agent

Constitutional Law Reporter

Boule , 596 U.S. _ (2022), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the authority of a court to imply a cause of action under Bivens v. While the Court did not overrule Bivens , it did emphasize that recognizing a Bivens cause of action is “a disfavored judicial activity.”. In Egbert v. Border Patrol agent. Anderson v.