ARTHUR G. NEWMYER v. THE SIDWELL FRIENDS SCHOOL and JAMES F. HUNTINGTON

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that a school psychiatrist’s romantic and sexual relationship with a student’s mother over the course of several months did not rise to the level of “extreme and outrageous” behavior
• explaining that the appellant’s “negligent supervision claim against Sidwell fails” because his underlying “claims against Dr. Huntington” failed
• applying same factors to claim of tortious interference with business or contractual relationships
• “We can discern no purpose behind [wide publication of the complaint] other than to brand Dr. Huntington with a scarlet letter by increasing public awareness of the lawsuit.”
• \mere 'conclusory allegations' are insufficient to defeat the [summary judgment] motion.\
• intentional infliction of emotional distress

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).