Britt v. Chestnut Hill College

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the plaintiff’s complaint for breach of contract was sufficient when he “generally averred that he had ‘fulfilled the requirements’ for his master’s degree and that the college failed to award it to him”
• explaining that a claim for the intentional infliction of emotional distress may be proven by a showing of either a specific or reckless intent to cause distress (citing Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46 (Am. L. Inst. 1965))
• stating, with regard to intentional infliction claim, “[i]n addition to requiring that a plaintiff establish that the conduct complained of was outrageous, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has required that the plaintiff present competent medical evidence to support the claim”
• count pleading intentional infliction of emotional distress seeks recovery for physical and emotional harm, which is distinct from harm identified in defamation count
• “In addition to requiring that a plaintiff establish that the conduct complained of was outrageous, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has required that the plaintiff present competent medical evidence to support the claim.”
• “In addition to requiring that a plaintiff establish that the conduct complained of was outrageous, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has required that the plaintiff present competent medical evidence to support the claim.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).