Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A common case would be a future threat of harm that would not constitute common law assault but would nevertheless cause emotional harm to the recipient. IIED was created to guard against this kind of emotional abuse, thereby allowing a victim of emotional distress to receive compensation in situations where he or she would otherwise be barred ...
Ultimately, Young instituted a federal habeas action. The court determined that the Community Protection Act was civil and, therefore, it could not violate the double jeopardy and ex post facto guarantees. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reasoned that the case turned on whether the Act was punitive "as applied" to Young. [5] 5th
NIED began to develop in the late nineteenth century, but only in a very limited form, in the sense that plaintiffs could recover for consequential emotional distress as a component of damages when a defendant negligently inflicted physical harm upon them. By 1908, most industrial U.S. states had adopted the "physical impact" form of NIED.
The allegation of “alienation of affection” now faces NC House Speaker Tim Moore in a recent lawsuit. Moore has denied the accusation. ... Though such cases are rare and often called archaic ...
A lawsuit accusing North Carolina officials of unnecessarily warehousing foster children in locked psychiatric facilities has survived the Department of Health and Human Services’ effort to ...
North Carolina’s lack of assessment and treatment services results in people with severe mental disabilities languishing in county jails while waiting months for psychiatric services, a lawsuit ...
This week, the North Carolina Supreme Court took up five related cases that will ultimately decide whether all or some of the lawsuits can move forward. Among the suited up attorneys in the ...
In 2017, the North Carolina Court of Appeals, in a different case, ruled that the common law cause of action of alienation of affection was not facially invalid under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. [27] In 2017 the North Carolina Court of Appeals ruled in a 3-0 decision to uphold the constitutionality of the tort. See Malecek v.