Saunders v. Nemati

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “an independent action for [IIED], not intertwined with any of the causes of action for which a period of limitation is specifically provided in the other provisions of [D.C. Code §] 12-301, is governed by the general three-year limitation of [D.C. Code §] 12-301(8)”
• explaining that “an independent action for intentional infliction of emotional distress, not intertwined with any of the causes of action for which a period of limitation is specifically provided …, is governed by the general residuary three-year limitation”
• applying Section 12-301(8)’s three-year statute of limitations to the plaintiff’s claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress
• describing cases in which “the nature of the action rested on the other torts and the emotional distress aspect of the claim was essentially an outgrowth of the other pleaded torts”
• “The action thus pleaded cannot ... be removed from its place in the law of torts by calling what occurred also [a breach of contract].”
• intentional infliction of emotion distress falls under D.C. Code § 12-301(8)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).