<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Feds open the door for employer’s liability for intentional infliction of emotional distress by mid-level managers.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://keefe-law.com/blog/index.php/2009/09/07/feds-open-the-door-for-employer%e2%80%99s-liability-for-intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress-by-mid-level-managers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://keefe-law.com/blog/2009/09/07/feds-open-the-door-for-employer%e2%80%99s-liability-for-intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress-by-mid-level-managers/</link>
	<description>KCA&#039;s Workers Compensation &#38; Employment Law Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 May 2010 14:31:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Arik</title>
		<link>http://keefe-law.com/blog/2009/09/07/feds-open-the-door-for-employer%e2%80%99s-liability-for-intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress-by-mid-level-managers/comment-page-1/#comment-5</link>
		<dc:creator>Arik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2009 13:14:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://keefecampbell.wordpress.com/?p=6#comment-5</guid>
		<description>From Black&#039;s: Dictum - A statement of opinion or belief considered authoritative because of the dignity of the person making it, a familiar rule or maxim

Perhaps the proper term would have been &quot;judicial dictum&quot; - An opinion by a court on a question that is directly involved, briefed, and argued by counsel, and even passed on by the court, but that is not essential to the decision.

In any case, I stand by the lay definition used above. Please remember, this blog is for the benefit of non-lawyers as well as those in the learned profession.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From Black&#8217;s: Dictum &#8211; A statement of opinion or belief considered authoritative because of the dignity of the person making it, a familiar rule or maxim</p>
<p>Perhaps the proper term would have been &#8220;judicial dictum&#8221; &#8211; An opinion by a court on a question that is directly involved, briefed, and argued by counsel, and even passed on by the court, but that is not essential to the decision.</p>
<p>In any case, I stand by the lay definition used above. Please remember, this blog is for the benefit of non-lawyers as well as those in the learned profession.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Arik</title>
		<link>http://keefe-law.com/blog/2009/09/07/feds-open-the-door-for-employer%e2%80%99s-liability-for-intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress-by-mid-level-managers/comment-page-1/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>Arik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2009 13:07:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://keefecampbell.wordpress.com/?p=6#comment-4</guid>
		<description>Anonymous wrote:

I take issue with your definition of the term dicta...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anonymous wrote:</p>
<p>I take issue with your definition of the term dicta&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Arik</title>
		<link>http://keefe-law.com/blog/2009/09/07/feds-open-the-door-for-employer%e2%80%99s-liability-for-intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress-by-mid-level-managers/comment-page-1/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>Arik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:38:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://keefecampbell.wordpress.com/?p=6#comment-3</guid>
		<description>The conduct wasn’t described in detail in the opinion as the issues were dealt with as matters of law. The only references are the manager “scolded”, “yelled at”, and “ma[d]e fun” of the employee.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The conduct wasn’t described in detail in the opinion as the issues were dealt with as matters of law. The only references are the manager “scolded”, “yelled at”, and “ma[d]e fun” of the employee.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Arik</title>
		<link>http://keefe-law.com/blog/2009/09/07/feds-open-the-door-for-employer%e2%80%99s-liability-for-intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress-by-mid-level-managers/comment-page-1/#comment-2</link>
		<dc:creator>Arik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:36:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://keefecampbell.wordpress.com/?p=6#comment-2</guid>
		<description>Anonymous wrote:

Why are you so shy about describing the conduct at issue?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anonymous wrote:</p>
<p>Why are you so shy about describing the conduct at issue?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.359 seconds -->
