Todd v. SC FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INS. CO.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding lying and violation of statute intended to protect employees did not support outrage claim
• holding endorsed by Hall, 866 S.E.2d at 345
• “The tort of outrage was designed not as a replacement for the existing tort actions. Rather, it was conceived as a remedy for tortious conduct where no remedy previously existed.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).