Leach v. F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining “the jury’s interpretation of the evidence” would be required to evaluate the actionable emotional distress where it was “unclear when the termination process began”
• denying motion to dismiss where employer’s letters requiring a physician to complete “fit for duty” and “release” before returning to work and caveating a position may not be available on return could have been “aimed toward ultimately terminating [plaintiff]”
• “Obviously, the jury’s conclusion as to whether the emotional distress was inflicted beyond the mere fact of termination of the plaintiff’s employment will depend upon the jury’s interpretation of the evidence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).