UFCW Local 1776 v. Eli Lilly & Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding an employee was acting within the scope of her employment when she made defamatory statements about a supervisor
• finding that postal clerk’s statements about supervisor’s work habits and his manner of supervision were not beyond the scope of employment because they arose during the course of an investigation in which statements were requested and reasonably anticipated
• dismissing defamation claim against federal employee acting in his official capacity and holding that “[t]his result must obtain even though it leaves the plaintiff with no available defendant against whom [the plaintiff] may pursue his claims of defamation.”
• acts of defamation were within an employee's scope of employment, even though such acts were not among the employee's listed duties or the product of a specific request from a supervisor
• citing, inter alia, 28 U.S.C. § 2679(b)(1)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).