Daryl A. Miller v. At & T Network Systems, an at & T Technologies, Inc. Group, Defendants

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “if the particular CBA does not govern the offending behavior, as in Tellez, then an emotional distress claim is not preempted”
• explaining that criminal behavior is, by virtue of its illegality, per se unreasonable
• plaintiff’s claim alleging discrimination is not preempted; emotional distress claim arising out of same conduct is
• \[a]ctions that the collective bargaining agreement permits might be deemed reasonable [and therefore not \extreme and outrageous\] in virtue of the fact that the [collective bargaining agreement] permits them.\
• specifically stating that not all claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress are preempted
• if employer's behavior was permitted under the CBA, it might per se be reasonable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).