William H. Moss v. Timothy Martin, Robert Millette, and Brian Piersma

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that job descriptions may serve as reliable evidence of actual duties of a position as long as no basis is presented for finding them systemically unreliable
• declining to find the direct supervisor of five employees and indirect supervisor of twenty employees exempt from protection
• “Duties that are contingent upon the determination of an insured’s ‘legal liability,’ or that arise only after adjudication or compromise, are uniquely associated with indemnity and do not imply the existence of a corresponding duty to defend.”
• manual stated an employee “may be discharged for cause”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).