Legal Opinion

Livitsanos v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Decided May 18, 1992No. S017174PublishedCited by 104 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

ARABIAN, J.

We granted review to consider whether the exclusive remedy provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Act apply to bar an employee’s claims for intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, where no physical injury or disability is alleged. We hold that claims for intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress are preempted by the exclusivity provisions of the workers’ compensation law, notwithstanding the absence of any compensable physical disability. We further conclude that, for unrelated reasons, the case must be remanded to the Court of Appeal for…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Foley v. Interactive Data Corp.California Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co.California Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Shoemaker v. MyersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Gantt v. Sentry InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Cole v. Fair Oaks Fire Protection DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by104 opinions

  1. Miklosy v. Regents of the University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Stevenson v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  3. CHARLES J. VACANTI v. State Comp. Ins. FundCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Fermino v. Fedco, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Singh v. Southland Stone, U.S.A., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2010

99 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API