Manning v. Grimsley: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
Lost Student (talk | contribs) m (1 revision imported) |
Lost Student (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
| followed = | | followed = | ||
| related = | | related = | ||
}} | }} | ||
'''Facts''': Plaintiff was attending a baseball game and was heckling a pitcher, when pitcher threw a ball that struck the P. | '''Facts''': Plaintiff was attending a baseball game and was heckling a pitcher, when pitcher threw a ball that struck the P. | ||
Revision as of 05:25, September 9, 2020
| Manning v. Grimsley | |
| Court | |
|---|---|
| Citation | |
| Date decided | |
Facts: Plaintiff was attending a baseball game and was heckling a pitcher, when pitcher threw a ball that struck the P.
Procedural History: Dist. judge directed verdict for D
Holding: Vacated and remanded
Reasons: Jury could have found that fans' actions constituted "conduct" which interfered with employee's performance of work.
Judgment: Vacated.
Comments: In Mass. when a plaintiff wants to recover from an employer, it must be shown that the employee's assault was in response to the plaintiff's conduct which was presently interfering wit the employee's ability to perform his duties successfully.
