Murray v. Oceanside Unified School District

How courts have described this case

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

• holding “actions that occurred before the . . . cutoff 16 date for the [statute of limitations] may be relied upon, if they fit the requirements of the 17 continuing violation doctrine for a common law cause of action for IIED.”
• continuing violations doctrine applies to IIED claim where the alleged outrageous conduct is an ongoing pattern of discrimination or retaliation
• finding exhaustion under § 98.7 not required because the statute used permissive, rather than mandatory, language regarding the administrative remedy, and because the substantive statutory provisions were silent as to administrative remedies
• “[W]here a plaintiff can allege 4 that she suffered emotional distress because of a pattern of continuing violations that were 5 discriminatory, her cause of action for infliction of emotional distress will not be barred by the 6 exclusivity provisions of workers’ compensation laws.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).