PAUL V. HOLBROOK
696 So.2d 1311 (1997)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Paul (P) appealed a summary judgment in favor of Holbrook (D), former
employer and co-worker, on P's claims for assault, battery, intentional infliction of
emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and negligent hiring and
retention.
FACTS: P and D are former employees of PMP. P testified that D was her co-worker and not
her supervisor. P alleges that D harassed her by asking that she wear revealing clothing and
suggesting that they engage in sexual relations. P claims that on two occasions, D came up
behind her while she was working and tried to massage her shoulders. On both occasions, P
immediately pulled away and told D to leave, which he did. After P complained to PMP's
management, she and D never again worked the same shifts and his improper behavior toward
her ended. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of PMP and D on P's claims for
assault, battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of
emotional distress and negligent hiring and retention. P appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment