State, Dept. of Admin. v. Schallock

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the acts of the employee need only be “in part, 12 motivated by a purpose to serve the master”
• reversing the Court of Appeals’ determination that a supervisor’s intentional infliction of 28 emotional distress—caused by the sexual harassment of a subordinate—could not be within the course and scope of employment as a matter of law
• identifying three factors when 23 considering incidental conduct: (1) time and place of conduct; (2) previous relation 24 between master and servant; and (3) whether the master had reason to expect that such act 25 would be done
• identifying three factors when 15 considering incidental conduct: (1) time and place of conduct; (2) previous relation 16 between master and servant; and (3) whether the master had reason to expect that such 17 act would be done
• finding reason to doubt that “acts were 27 unauthorized and outside the course of employment when the employer permitted them to 28 occur and recur over a long period at its place of business and during business hours”
• \One can hardly be surprised when sexual harassment that has occurred for years continues.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).