A claim for intentional inflection of emotional distress will be established when the plaintiff is able to prove that: 1) the defendant intended to inflicted emotional distress or knew or should have known emotional distress would likely result from his conduct; 2) the defendant's conduct was extreme and outrageous; 3) the defendant's actions were the cause of the plaintiff's distress; and, 4) the plaintiff suffered severe emotional distress. Agis v. Howard Johnson Co., 355 N.E.2d 315, 319 (Mass. 1976). Ms. Stockton will likely be able to meet to the first element of the claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress. Ms. Stockton must prove that the radio station broadcasters intended to inflict emotional distress or that the broadcasters …show more content…
Stockton will be able to prove that the defendant's actions were the cause of her distress. Agis v. Howard Johnson Co., 355 N.E.2d 315, 319 (Mass. 1976). Ms. Stockton must prove that the broadcasters actions were the cause of the plaintiff's distress. Id. To establish that a plaintiff's distress was a result of defendant's actions the court in Agis, found that a clear time frame had been established from when the defendant fired Agis to when she suffered emotional distress immediately following the unfair firing. Id. at 317. The immediate distress causation to meet the burden of causation. Agis v. Howard Johnson Co., 355 N.E.2d 315, (Mass. 1976). The court also found in Simon v. Solomon that a landlords inaction was also enough to establish causation. Simon v. Solomon, 431 N.E.2d 556, (Mass. 1982). In Simon, the defendant's inaction in regards to fixing a recurring problem that caused the plaintiff's apartment to continuously flood was enough to establish causation. Id. The court concluded that but for the defendant's inaction the plaintiff would not have suffered the distress and therefore the distress was the result of such inaction. Simon v. Solomon, 431 N.E.2d 556, 566 (Mass. 1982). In Ms. Stockton's case prior to the broadcasters repeated conduct she had not suffered from emotional distress, but following the repeated conduct by the broadcasters she began to suffer distress. As established by Simon, but for the broadcasters repeated conduct Ms. Stockton would not …show more content…
Stockton will likely be able to prove that the distress she suffered was severe. Ms. Stockton must prove that she suffered severe emotional distress. Agis v. Howard Johnson Co., 355 N.E.2d 315, 319 (Mass. 1976). The court in Agis held that the distress was severe is it was “of a nature that no reasonable man could be expected to endure” Id. The same case found that the plaintiff's bursting into tears and experiencing mental anguish was enough to establish that the emotional distress suffered was severe. Id. at 317. The court in Simon also established that the plaintiff's emotional distress as severe due to her becoming withdrawn and ashamed, as a result of the defendant's inaction. Simon v. Solomon, 431 N.E.2d 556, 560 (Mass. 1982). The symptoms of emotional distress have been found by courts to be enough to find it to be severe, even if the defendant's actions simply resulted in the plaintiff crying and is not limited to requiring medical attention. Agis v. Howard Johnson Co., 355 N.E.2d 315, 317 (Mass. 1976). In Ms. Stockton's case following the broadcasters mocking of Ms. Stockton she felt embarrassed by their conduct. After the broadcasters repeated the conduct Ms. Stockton became a nervous wreck that was unable to look at her wedding pictures without crying. This behavior the court in Agis would have found to be enough of an emotional distress to be severe. Agis v. Howard Johnson Co., 355 N.E.2d 315, (Mass. 1976). Thus, Ms. Stockton will likely to able to prove
Yandrich v. Radic, plaintiff was not successful in his claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff’s father committed suicide allegedly due to his depression from another son being killed by a car. 495 A.2d 460, 246 (Pa. 1981). The Court found that the father was not a witness because he was not in the immediate vicinity of the accident, and thus could not find for the plaintiff in this case. The differences between Yandrich and Ms. Nordlund’s claim outweigh their legal similarities, as the father in Yandrich did not see the scene of the accident like Ms. Nordlund did. Ms. Nordlund’s poor vision is a weakness in her claim, but having heard and seen the accident, (despite her blurry vision), may be strong enough to overcome
Intentional infliction of emotional distress - the Court states that because Texas law places a duty on Briles and McCaw, the Plaintiff 's negligence claim will fill any gaps.
infliction of emotional distress from Ms. Lucas. The court’s decision in Harris v. Jones, 281 Md.
. The husband of the plaintiff file a petition to the court that his wife[plaintiff] is mentally ill and needs to have a court order directing the admission of her to the mental health hospital. The petition initiated by plaintiff’s husband is the order of the Wayne County probate court, and it is also appropriately certified by Doctors Wolodzko, who after appearing in her house and introducing himself as a doctor , and have a conversation with her in person that day and another day in telephone, determine that she is suffering from paranoid schizophrenia and Smyk. The court gave the order and the Plaintiff was taken by ambulance from her home to a private psychiatric
2. Facts: Plaintiff Irene George (P) is filing suit against Defendant Jordan Marsh Co. (D) for mental anguish and emotional distress which resulted in two heart attacks. D sold goods on credit to P’s emancipated son, who purchased them on P’s account. D alleged that P stated in writing that she would pay the debts (which she did not incur), even though it is understood that P did not make this guarantee. D then attempted to intimidate P into paying these debts she did not owe by calling her at late hours, by mailing her bills, by sending her letters stating late charges were being added on and that her credit had been revoked, and by numerous other tactics. P suffered great
In our case, the plaintiff wouldn’t be granted compensation for the intentional infliction of emotional distress because he didn’t prove that the behavior of the defendant caused him severe emotional distress.
Plaintiff further asserts that the Defendant breached its duty of care to her by: (1) “failing to fix a hazardous condition within a reasonable time;” (2) “failing to adequately warn plaintiff of a hazardous condition;” and (3) “otherwise failing to exercise reasonable and due care under the circumstances.” The Plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages in the amount of two hundred thousand dollars, plus interest and costs.
2. The outcome of this issue is governed by Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46 (1965) Outrageous Conduct Causing Severe Emotional Distress. The elements of this cause of action are (1) the wrongdoer's conduct was intentional or reckless, that is, he intended his behavior when he knew or should have known that emotional distress would likely result; (2) the conduct was outrageous, that is, as to go beyond all bounds of decency, and to be regarded as odious and utterly intolerable in a civilized community; (3) the conduct caused the emotional distress; and (4) the emotional distress was severe.
In Pennsylvania, a plaintiff claiming negligent infliction of emotional distress must establish one of these four situations: “1) that the defendant had a contractual or fiduciary duty; 2) plaintiff suffered a physical impact; 3) plaintiff was in a “zone of danger” and at risk of an immediate physical injury; or 4) plaintiff had a contemporaneous perception of tortious injury to a close relative.” Doe v. Phila. Cmty. Health Alternatives AIDS Task Force, 754 A.2d 25, 27 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2000). The first element does not apply to our client because there was no fiduciary or contractual duty relationship. Secondly, it could be argued that Nordlund suffered a physical impact because after Sumner’s accident, Nordlund could not eat, could not
The tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress has four elements: 1. the defendant must act intentionally or recklessly; 2. the defendant's conduct must be extreme and outrageous; and 3. the conduct must be the cause 4. of severe emotional distress. This is exactly what happened din this case. Steve Steel not only knocked the phone out of Prudence’s hand but also broke down the door and threatened Prudence with force and made her scared for her life. I do believe that negligence is a part of this case. A person who engages in activities that pose an unreasonable risk toward others and their property that actually results in harm, breaches their duty of reasonable care. Steve Steel did not show a proper care of duty with Prudence. I think that Steve Steel should also be responsible for all of the physical and mental damages since he did not show reasonable care. I think the tort liability in this case would be assault and battery. An assault involves three things that we see in this case. An assault occurs when an intentional, unlawful threat or "offer" to cause bodily injury to another by force; under circumstances which create in the other person a well-founded fear of imminent peril; where there exists the apparent present ability to carry out the act if not prevented. A battery is the willful or intentional touching of a person against that person’s will by another person, or by an object or
A disorder must present these indicators to be classified as a psychological disorder. Deviant behavior can be described as behavior that is unusual or different from that of what society has deemed as acceptable and normal. Distressful behavior is behavior that is unpleasant and upsetting. Dysfunctional behavior is behavior that disputes or interferes with an individual’s ability to function on a daily basis. Distress must also go along with deviant behavior in order for it to be considered a disorder. For example, depression qualifies as a disorder because it displays all three of the following characteristics: deviant, distressful and dysfunctional. It qualifies as deviant because it is not normal for an individual to feel sad, hopeless
Issue: Under Kentucky tort law, does intentional infliction of emotional distress occur when a person suffers severe insomnia and anxiety as a result of witnessing a friend¡¦s child being injured by a vehicle that is out of control due to being driven at a high rate
> in case you're feeling and don't have anybody to depend on, clinicians can offer assistance. As specialists in human conduct, therapists can help you create systems to oversee stretch and enhance your social abilities.
To state a claim for NIED, a plaintiff must show that: (1) he was located near the scene of the accident; (2) he sensorily and contemporaneously observed the accident; and (3) he and the victim are closely related. Sinn v. Burd, 404 A.2d 672, at 685 (Pa. 1979). There can be little dispute that Arnett was near the scene of the accident. However, whether Arnett sensorily and contemporaneously observed the incident and whether Nolan and Arnett are closely related are in question. This memorandum will address all three
The appellant’s second submission concerned the way the judge in the first instance referenced sudden and temporary loss of self-control to the jury in the direction. The appellant submitted that this direction was incorrect. He also proposed that the learned Judge’s direction regarding the appellant’s characteristics in an attempt to use the model set by Lord Diplock in DPP v Camplin. The counsel for the appellant criticized the learned judges direction on two grounds: Firstly, that the Judge did not mention that the appellant was suffering from a condition known as the battered woman’s syndrome which so affected her personality that it put her in a state of learnt helplessness. Secondly, that the list of characteristics should have been left open so that the jury may pick up on the fact that she suffered from a