قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Insurance / The Court rules against the argument of exclusive measures in harassment

The Court rules against the argument of exclusive measures in harassment



A lawyer who was successfully sued by a former legal assistant for intentionally inflicting emotional distress and sexual harassment failed in his appeal in an attempt to enforce the Massachusetts Workers & # 39; Compensation Act exclusivity clause as part of his attempt to reverse an award of $ 190,000, according to a decision filed Wednesday in a state appeal.

Edward P. Holzberg, was found liable to the plaintiff, his former employee, after three years of alleged harassment focusing on her gender and race, many of which included name-calling, descriptive sexual encounters and other sex-related acts described in court documents no. 19-P-778 was filed in the Appeals Court of Massachusetts in Essex, Massachusetts.

The Board of Appeal, which upheld the previous judgment and rejected Holzberg's appeal that the exclusive remedies precluded the trial, cited 30-year case law in which the State Supreme Court "recognized an exception to the exclusivity clause and argued that an application is not applicable" against an employee who commits an intentional liability that was in no way within the framework of the employment in order to promote the employer's interests. " [

[1

9659002]

Catalog


Source link