Legal Opinion

Mintz v. Bell Atlantic Systems Leasing International, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided July 18, 1995No. 1 CA-CV 93-0218PublishedCited by 96 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

NOYES, Judge.

After she failed to receive an expected promotion, Appellant Mintz suffered an emotional breakdown and later sued Appellee Bell Atlantic, her employer, and Appellee Schoenlank, her supervisor. The trial court *552granted Appellees’ motion to dismiss. We affirm because we conclude that 1) there is no tort claim for wrongful failure to promote, 2) the complaint does not state a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress, and 3) a supervisor acting in the course and scope of employment does not tortiously interfere with a plaintiffs contract of employment when he…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Foley v. Interactive Data Corp.California Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Wagenseller v. Scottsdale Memorial HospitalArizona Supreme Court · 1985
  3. John H. Cox v. Keystone Carbon Company, Richard Reuscher and William ReuscherCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1988
  4. Ford v. Revlon, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 1987
  5. Donnelly Const. Co. v. Oberg/Hunt/GillelandArizona Supreme Court · 1984

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

3Cited by96 opinions

  1. Evelyn Bodett, Wife David Bodett, Husband v. Coxcom, Inc., a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
  2. A.G. Ex Rel. Grundemann v. Paradise Valley Unified School District No. 69Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
  3. Craig v. M & O AGENCIES, INC.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
  4. White v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1997
  5. White v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1997

91 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