Mead v. Western Slate, Inc.
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.
¶ 1. Defendants Western Slate, Inc. and Jeffrey N. Harri-
son appeal from the denial of their post-trial motions for judgment as a matter of law, or in the alternative, for a new trial, following a jury verdict finding them liable for injuries to their employee, plaintiff Martin Mead, Jr., under the intentional-injury exception to the workers’ compensation law. Defendants contend the court erred in ruling that the exception could be satisfied by a showing that they knew to a “substantial certainty” their conduct would result in plaintiffs injury. We conclude that the evidence was insufficient…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Suarez v. Dickmont Plastics Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Woodson v. RowlandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
- Reed Tool Co. v. CopelinTexas Supreme Court · 1985
- Millison v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1985
- Birklid v. Boeing Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1995
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Stamp Tech, Inc. v. Lydall/Thermal Acoustical, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2009
- Robles v. Hovensa, L.L.C.Supreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 2008
- Chayer v. Ethan Allen, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2008
- Garger v. DesrochesSupreme Court of Vermont · 2009
- Ira Martel v. Connor Contracting, Inc., Jason Clark, and Stephen ConnorSupreme Court of Vermont · 2018
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.