tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7916767120530431852.post8374679044296002343..comments2024-03-23T13:03:48.917-04:00Comments on Labour Pains: Wal-Mart Rolls Back Award of Punitive DamagesSean Bawdenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12478582658843470140noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7916767120530431852.post-47659650318391533312014-07-11T19:31:01.978-04:002014-07-11T19:31:01.978-04:00As usual a well-written, easily understood summati...As usual a well-written, easily understood summation of the case. Thanks Sean!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7916767120530431852.post-57010018330317428622014-05-26T12:29:18.219-04:002014-05-26T12:29:18.219-04:00Justin, while I can see your point I am not sure t...Justin, while I can see your point I am not sure that I fully agree. I have re-read paragraphs 48, 51, and 55 and believe that Justice Laskin did intend to lower the threshold such that the "harm" necessary for the second criterion of Prinzo can include forced resignation from employment.<br /><br />Justice Laskin's comments about the actual harm go to the third criterion, I would submit.Sean Bawdenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12478582658843470140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7916767120530431852.post-59725920985350920022014-05-26T10:45:26.589-04:002014-05-26T10:45:26.589-04:00Further to that, look at paragraph 55- "The h...Further to that, look at paragraph 55- "The harm Boucher incurred because of Pinnock’s conduct was severe. She suffered serious physical symptoms. She went from a cheerful, productive worker to a broken and defeated employee, left with no reasonable alternative but to resign. Her symptoms eased only when Pinnock no longer controlled her employment."Justin Tetreaulthttp://www.grosman.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7916767120530431852.post-73410628270803010242014-05-26T10:43:55.760-04:002014-05-26T10:43:55.760-04:00I think you are reading paragraph 51 too narrowly....I think you are reading paragraph 51 too narrowly. You can't just read the first 2 sentences and ignore the 3rd sentence that the manager wanted to cause emotional distress or mental anguish. <br /><br />The way I read it the "harm" was the emotional distress and the motive for causing that harm was to make her quit. The harm was not the intention to make Boucher quit.Justin Tetreaulthttp://www.grosman.comnoreply@blogger.com