 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Regents of University of California v. Superior Court of Alameda County1/30/2002
on which would entitle the plaintiff to punitive damages for another tort. Liability has been found only where the conduct has been outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.'" (Id. at p. 496, quoting Rest.2d Torts, ยง 46, com. d, p. 73.) Cochran reinforces our conclusion that the petitioners' alleged motive for denying Rui's application, no matter how improper, does not satisfy the extreme and outrageous conduct requirement. The trial court's contrary conclusion was legally erroneous.
In summary, we hold that the decision to reject an application to a law school or a university does not itself constitute extreme and outrageous conduct regardless of the decision makers' alleged motive. To allege a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress based on such a rejection, the plaintiff must, as a threshold requirement, allege facts to show that the rejection decision was communicated to the applicant in an extreme and outrageous manner. Since no such facts were alleged in this case, petitioners' demurrer to the fourth cause of action should have been sustained.
IV. DISPOSITION
Let a peremptory writ of mandate issue directing the superior court to vacate its order overruling petitioners' demurrer to the fourth cause of action and to enter a new order sustaining the demurrer to said cause of action without leave to amend. Costs are awarded to petitioners.
We concur:
Kline, P.J.
Ruvolo, J.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 California Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|