Sisk v. Tar Heel Capital Corp.

603 S.E.2d 564 (2004)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
S
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Sisk v. Tar Heel Capital Corp.

North Carolina Court of Appeals
603 S.E.2d 564 (2004)

JL

Facts

Christina Sisk (plaintiff) worked in a Wendy’s Restaurant operated by Tar Heel Capital Corp. (Tar Heel) (defendant). James Johnson became the general manager of the restaurant in 2001 and was Sisk’s direct supervisor. Johnson sexually harassed Sisk by inappropriately touching her, putting his hand down her shirt, pulling her into his lap, and making sexual comments. Sisk resigned by giving notice to the district manager and director of human resources. Sisk stated in her notice that she had resigned due to Johnson’s harassment. Sisk had not filed any previous complaints, and this was the first time that the district manager and human resources director had been informed of the harassment. Sisk required medical care as a result of the harassment. Tar Heel investigated the allegations and fired Johnson. Tar Heel offered Sisk the opportunity to return to work, but Sisk declined. Sisk was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and major depressive disorder. Sisk filed a claim for workers’ compensation with the Full Commission of North Carolina Industrial Commission. The commission determined that her injury occurred in the course of her employment, but the injury did not arise out of the employment. The commission denied Sisk’s claim, and she appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Tyson, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 819,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 819,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 819,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Torts

Key Terms