Swenson v. Northern Crop Insurance, Inc.
Supreme Court of North Dakota
498 N.W.2d 174 (1993)
- Written by Nicholas Decoster, JD
Facts
Caroline Swenson (plaintiff) started working for Northern Crop Insurance, Inc. (NCI) (defendant) as a secretary. After the office manager resigned 10 months later, Swenson was promoted to the office-manager position. NCI’s general manager, John Krasbeth (defendant), opposed the promotion because he believed the position was better suited for a man. Following Swenson’s promotion, Krasbeth made repeated derogatory and sexist comments toward Swenson and threatened to replace her with a man. Krasbeth then reorganized the office and demoted Swenson to a clerk and typist position with less pay than her initial position as a secretary. Two new positions were given to men, and Swenson was not given an opportunity to apply due to her gender. Krasbeth avoided Swenson and refused to speak to her. Swenson was a recovering alcoholic, and the stress caused by the gender discrimination required her to seek counseling and treatment. Krasbeth was aware of Swenson’s unstable emotional condition stemming from her history as an alcoholic. After leaving NCI, Swenson brought a lawsuit against NCI and Krasbeth, alleging intentional infliction of emotional distress. The trial judge granted summary judgment in favor of NCI and Krasbeth, holding that a reasonable jury could not find their alleged conduct sufficiently outrageous to support Swenson’s claim. Swenson appealed the decision.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Erickstad, J.)
Concurrence (Levine, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 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.