First Circuit· 5/19/2005

Norton v. McOsker

Citations

407 F.3d 501
2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 9042
2005 WL 1177227

How courts have described this case

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

ruling that a plaintiff’s tort and 18 contract claims did not fall under the domestic relation exception although the claims were related 19 to the dissolution of the parties’ marriage
summarizing that a claim of IIED required proving intentional or reckless disregard of probability of causing emotional distress; extreme and outrageous conduct; causal connection between wrongful conduct and emotional distress; and severe emotional distress
explaining a federal district court sitting in diversity is governed by state law, which it ascertains by, inter alia, “[r]elying on pronouncements of the state supreme court”
“Notwithstanding the fact that this case has grown out of the dissolution of an intimate relationship, Norton's claims do not sound in family law, let alone the specific areas of divorce, alimony, and child custody. Instead, Norton brought tort and contract claims.”
“Generally, courts consider whether the relationship created sufficient vulnerability to create a duty on the part of the defendant to avoid inflicting emotional distress.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Boudin, Torruella, Saris

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

31 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.