Dolly Kyle Browning and Direct Outstanding Creations Corporation v. William Jefferson Clinton

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress is “reserved for truly outrageous behavior”
• holding that the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress is “reserved for truly outrageous behavior”
• holding that when a tortious interference claim is based solely on allegedly defamatory remarks, it is \intertwined\ with plaintiff's defamation claim and therefore subject to the same one-year statute of limitations
• holding that defamation’s one-year statute of limitations applied to tortious interference with business expectancy claim where the defamatory conduct was “the sole basis for ... the tortious interference — ”
• holding that when a tortious interference claim is based solely on allegedly defamatory remarks, it is “intertwined” with plaintiff’s defamation claim and therefore subject to the same one-year statute of limitations
• holding that when a tortious interference claim is based solely on allegedly defamatory remarks, it is “intertwined” with plaintiff’s defamation claim and therefore subject to the same one-year statute of limitations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).