In Miklosy v. Regents of University of California (2008) 44 Cal.4th 876, 902, the Supreme Court held that "'severe emotional distress'" arising from "'outrageous'" conduct transpiring "at the worksite, in the normal course of the employer-employee relationship" were the type of injuries barred by the workers' compensation exclusivity rule. There, the Court reiterated its prior holding in Livitsanos v. Superior Court (1992) 2 Cal.4th 744, 754, stating that: "so long as the basic conditions of compensation are otherwise satisfied (Lab. Code, 3600), and the employer's conduct neither contravenes fundamental public policy nor exceeds the risks inherent in the employment relationship , an employee's emotional distress injuries are subsumed under the exclusive remedy provisions of workers' compensation."