Mini Research Report: Useful Secondary Source on Different Cases
A. Mini Research Report
Note: As announced in class, n a change to the syllabus, you will be turning in a partial list of your research results. This is a required Participation Points assignment.
Answer these questions:
1. What was the most useful secondary source you found and why? 2. List 3 cases that you would likely use in your WA
2 memo; for each case, briefly (in no more than a few sentences) explain why you chose that case.
3. Briefly (in no more than one or two paragraphs) explain how you implemented the “Mercedes Benz” approach in your research, providing details about searches, sources consulted, etc.
Provide the proper Bluebook citations for each source. To help you get started with Bluebook case citation, I recommend that you consult a great online resource, the “Georgetown Library Bluebook Guide,” particularly the sections on citing cases and citing other resources: Click Here Include your name and that of your partner if you are working with one (submit one report per pair). There are no other formatting requirements for this assignment.
Question 1
The most useful secondary source that I retrieved from the literature search was:
Marina Sorkina Amendola, Intentional infliction of emotional distress: A workplace perspective, 43, Vt. L. Rev. 93 (2018).
The secondary source is a law review paper that examines the emergence of the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) as one of the ways through which employees can use to recover damages from employers. To this end, the source explores the background of IIED as an innovation in tort law that sought to increase the power of employees when facing their employers in a court of law. Then, the source offers a discussion of the various elements of IIED and the threshold that has been set for the plaintiff to succeed in proving IIED claims. Notably, the source proceeds to explore the instances where employers have successfully used the tort to claim compensation from the employers in an attempt to predict how the court is likely to rule when determining a given case with IIED claims.
Question 2
Nickerson v. Hodges, 84 So. 37, 37-39 (La. 1920). The legal case details a ruling on an instance where the defendant planted a false treasure to trick an eccentric woman who had a history of mental instability. After unveiling the treasure, the resulting humiliation led to a mental breakdown due to the belief that she was robbed of a family treasure. The Court opined that the defendant was liable for her injuries despite their lack of intent due to the plaintiff’s known vulnerability. The case was picked as it provides a standard for judging the outrageousness...