What exactly should one do to deserve reimbursement? Click on this link and let me know your thoughts.
http://www.courttv.com/people/bloomblog/112706_ctv.html
I won't share my thoughts just yet ...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It is what it is ...
1 comment:
"Doss and McBride's best legal theory is probably intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) — extreme and outrageous conduct intended to harm another, which causes emotional injury."
There's just one problem: that's not the definition of IIED, which under the common law requires "severe" emotional distress -- hurt feelings don't qualify. And mere speech, without more, is never "extreme and outrageous conduct." Some actual, um, "conduct" is required for an IIED claim.
Oh, and there's that pesky First Amendment too. Shucks.
There's a complex, arcane legal principle governing incidents like this: "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never harm me."
Post a Comment