Thomas v. Northern Telecom, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the exclusivity provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Act did not bar claims of IIED and NIED against the employer based on the allegations of racial and disability discrimination
• noting that “it is extremely rare to find conduct in the employment context that will rise to the level of outrageousness necessary to support a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress”
• finding that African American plaintiffs allegations that defendant (1) gave her an excessive workload compared to her co-workers; (2) requited that she receive supetvisor permission to attend physical therapy while allowing white employees to attend therapy whenever they wanted; (3
• finding that African American plaintiffs allegations that defendant (1) gave her an excessive workload compared to her co-workers; (2) required that she receive supervisor petmission to attend physical therapy while allowing white employees to attend therapy whenever they wanted; (3
• granting motion to dismiss IIED claim despite allegations of disparate treatment, hostile work environment and retaliation in violation of Title VII
• dismissing claims for negligent infliction of emotional distress because plaintiff alleged discriminatory conduct, which is “inherently intentional” (citing Mitchell, 1994 WL 38703, at -4)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).