Aro

INTRODUCTION

After a bench trial, the trial court found a random drug test administered by a debt

collector, Legal Recovery Law Offices (LRLO), to its employees to be unreasonable and

outrageous and further found this conduct was intended to and did cause employees Seth W.

Aro and James T. O'Toole severe emotional distress. LRLO appeals the judgment in favor

of Aro and O'Toole for intentional infliction of emotional distress contending (1) their cause of action is barred by the workers' compensation exclusivity doctrine and (2)

there was insufficient evidence to support the court's findings on the elements of intentional

infliction of emotional distress. We disagree with both contentions and affirm the

judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A

Aro and O'Toole (collectively, plaintiffs) were hired by LRLO as debt collectors.

Their duties were to find information about the debtors and attempt to contact them to

arrange for voluntary payment before undertaking additional legal efforts. If the cases were

prosecuted successfully and judgment was awarded, the collectors could make a

commission in addition to their hourly rate.

The hiring…