How cited: Cluster 1318461 · Go Syfert

Cluster 1318461

green · 235 citation events across 10 courts. Showing the 5 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Quote Authority · N.C. Ct. App.
See Martin v. Cavalier Hotel Corp., 48 F.3d 1343, 1350-52 (1995) (where supervisor's sexual misconduct occurred "in the workplace, during working hours, on an employee whom he had authority to hire, fire, promote, and discipline," supervisor acted within scope of his employment such that employer is vicariously liable in action grounded on supervisor's actions); Hogan v. Forsyth Country Club Co., 79 N.C.App. 483, 492 , 340 S.E.2d 116, 122 , disc. review denied, 317 N.C. 334 …
"`designation "manager" implies general power and permits a reasonable inference that he was vested with the general conduct and control of defendant's business..., and his acts are, when committed in the line of his duty and in the scope of his employment, those of the company'"
Quote Authority · N.C. Ct. App.
App. 483, 492 , 340 S.E.2d 116, 122 , disc. review denied, 317 N.C. 334 , 346 S.E.2d 140 (1986) (“ ‘designation “manager” implies general power and permits a reasonable inference that he was vested with the general conduct and control of defendant’s business . . ., and his acts are, when committed in the line of his duty and in the scope of his employment, those of the company’ ”) (quoting Gillis v. Tea Co., 223 N.C. 470, 474 , 27 S.E.2d 283, 285 (1943)).
“ ‘designation “manager” implies general power and permits a reasonable inference that he was vested with the general conduct and control of defendant’s business . . ., and his acts are, when committed in the line of his duty and in the scope of his employment, those of the company’ ”
green Riley v. Debaer (2002)
Cited · N.C. Ct. App. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion
See Hogan v. Forsyth Country Club Co., 79 N.C.App. 483 , 340 S.E.2d 116 , rev. denied by 317 N.C. 334 , 346 S.E.2d 140 (1986) (holding that the exclusivity provisions of the Workers' Compensation Act did not bar a claim of IIED against the employer based on the allegation of sexual harassment); Brown v. Burlington Industries, Inc., 93 N.C.App. 431 , 378 S.E.2d 232 , rev. allowed by 325 N.C. 270 , 384 S.E.2d 513 , cert. allowed by 325 N.C. 704 , 387 S.E.2d 55 (1989), and rev.…
holding that the exclusivity provisions of the Workers' Compensation Act did not bar a claim of IIED against the employer based on the allegation of sexual harassment
green Waddle v. Sparks (1990)
Cited · N.C. Ct. App. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion
See Hogan v. Forsyth Country Club Co., 79 N.C.App. 483 , 340 S.E.2d 116 , disc. review denied, 317 N.C. 334 , 346 S.E.2d 140 (1986). *688 In summary, we hold that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment against plaintiff Waddle and did not err in granting summary judgment against plaintiff Simpson and remand to the trial court for action consistent with this opinion.
Cited (see also) · E.D.N.C. · signal: see, e.g. · 2 citations in this opinion
See, e.g., Hogan v. Forsyth Country Club Co., 79 N.C.App. 483 , 340 S.E.2d 116 , disc. rev. denied, 317 N.C. 334 , 346 S.E.2d 140 (1986); Woodruff v. Miller, 64 N.C.App. 364 , 307 S.E.2d 176 (1983).