context: M.B.M. The magistrate properly granted summary judgment on this claim.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 743 S.W.2d 380, 382-83
citation_a.parenthetical: employer's conduct allegedly designed to force suspected "whistle blower" to resign was insufficient to support jury verdict for outrage
citation_a.sentence: See Sterling Drug, Inc. v. Oxford, 294 Ark. 239, 743 S.W.2d 380, 382-83 (1988) (employer’s conduct allegedly designed to force suspected “whistle blower” to resign was insufficient to support jury verdict for outrage); cf. Counce, 268 Ark. at 281, 596 S.W.2d at 688 (summary judgment was inappropriate where employer withheld discharged employee’s paycheck even after employee successfully passed lie detector test).
citation_b.signal: cf.
citation_b.identifier: 268 Ark. 281, 281
citation_b.parenthetical: summary judgment was inappropriate where employer withheld discharged employee's paycheck even after employee successfully passed lie detector test
citation_b.sentence: See Sterling Drug, Inc. v. Oxford, 294 Ark. 239, 743 S.W.2d 380, 382-83 (1988) (employer’s conduct allegedly designed to force suspected “whistle blower” to resign was insufficient to support jury verdict for outrage); cf. Counce, 268 Ark. at 281, 596 S.W.2d at 688 (summary judgment was inappropriate where employer withheld discharged employee’s paycheck even after employee successfully passed lie detector test).