Michael Robert Womble v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plaintiff’s claim for tortious interference with a contract should not be dismissed because it “require[d] an assessment of state of mind[] and should be evaluated on the basis of a factual record”
• drawing \every reasonable inference in [nonmovant's] favor\ and accepting \the sum and substance of the factual allegations contained in the [pleadings]\
• denying motion to dismiss where the defendant’s alleged breaches of contract “support a reasonable inference that defendant acted with actual malice”
• allowing a tortious interference claim to continue to discovery because the plaintiff had already pled sufficient facts to show that the defendant, a corporate officer, had retaliated against the plaintiff employee
• \The Wage Act prohibits an employer from exempting itself from the timely and complete payment of wages by 'special contract'\ [emphasis added; citation omitted]
• “Whether the plaintiff did actually rely on [the] promises, and whether her reliance ultimately was reasonable, are of course fact questions that may not be resolved on a motion to dismiss”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).