Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Jones filed suit in federal district court on December 14, 2009, alleging defamation, libel per se, false light, and intentional infliction of emotional distress under state tort law. Jones was a resident of Northern Kentucky, a teacher at Dixie Heights High School in Edgewood, Kentucky and a member of the cheerleading squad of the Cincinnati ...
The lawsuits allege the school district knew about the abuse and did not tell parents or police. The school is located in the Myrtle Beach area. Parents suing Horry County Schools over abuse of ...
Their children, the Douglases say, suffered emotional and mental distress, the "loss of ability to focus on school" and civil rights violations. They're seeking damages in excess of $10,000.
Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988), the Supreme Court ruled that a parody advertisement claiming Jerry Falwell had engaged in an incestuous act with his mother in an outhouse, while false, could not allow Falwell to win damages for emotional distress because the statement was so obviously ridiculous that it was clearly not true; an allegation believed ...
They are accusing the Newport Public Schools of negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress and violating their duty to care for their son, who has since left the district.
Intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED; sometimes called the tort of outrage) [1] is a common law tort that allows individuals to recover for severe emotional distress caused by another individual who intentionally or recklessly inflicted emotional distress by behaving in an "extreme and outrageous" way. [2]
LEXINGTON, Ky. (AP) — Two former Kentucky swim team members have sued the school, former coach Lars Jorgensen and athletic director Mitch Barnhart, alleging sexual assaults including rape by the former coach and claiming the school “purposefully” disregarded multiple credible reports of inappropriate sexual relationships.
Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. 443 (2011), is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that speech made in a public place on a matter of public concern cannot be the basis of liability for a tort of emotional distress, even if the speech is viewed as offensive or outrageous.