Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

Question 1

IIED Definition

Answer 1

Defendant is liable for intentional infliction of emotional distress when the defendant voluntarily acts intentionally or recklessly by extreme and outrageous conduct that causes another to suffer severe emotional distress.

Question 2

IIED Public Policy

Answer 2

this tort protects individual from antisocial behavior. The individual has the right to freedom from mental distress.

Question 3

Elements of IIED

Answer 3

Voluntary: without outside influence; of one’s own free will

Acts: the external manifestation of the actor’s will

Intent: 3 types of intent
- specific: acting with purpose or desire to produce the consequences
general: the defendant sets in motion a chain of events knowing with substantial certainty that an outcome is likely to occur
transferred: intending to commit a tort against one person, but accidentally committing it against another person.

Recklessly: high degree of disregard for the outcome

Outrageous and extreme: the court will consider this conduct by factoring the plaintiff’s personality, whether the defendant’s conduct may be reasonably regarded as extreme and outrageous, and the jury will determine whether the conduct is extreme and outrageous enough to result in liability

Severe emotional distress: suffering that no reasonable person should be expected to endure

Question 4

IIED Sub Rules

Answer 4

Exception: if defendant has knowledge of the plaintiff’s sensitivity and the defendant seeks to exploit it, the defendant’s behavior is extreme and outrageous

Expansion to severity: when IIED is accompanies by another tort, then plaintiff does not have to prove that distress was severe

Battery, false imprisonment, or assault CANNOT be transferred for intentional infliction of emotional distress. In other words, you cannot intend to commit intentional infliction of emotional distress and then a battery results.

When IIED is accompanied by another tort, then the plaintiff does not have to prove that they suffered IIED

Courts are reluctant to adjudicate internal family disputes or subject them to tort law sanctions; however, when conduct exceeds all reasonable bounds of behavior tolerated by society, courts are likely to find that a claim has been stated.

What if hospital had a policy of placing patients with HIV in the same rooms as patients who were not, without disclosing that fact? Courts find as a matter of law that the mere fear of contracting a disease without actual exposure to it, cannot be sufficient to cause the level of distress necessary for tort outrage.

Plaintiff must prove severe emotional distress, not just mere emotional distress

Courts will generally rely on factors such as the plaintiff’s flagrant and serious conduct to find proof that they have suffered severe emotional distress

Third party IIED:
o Restatement (Second) s. 46(2) WOULD allow recovery if defendant knows of bystander’s presence and (1) the conduct was directed at a member of the bystander’s immediate family or (2) bystander suffers bodily harm as a result of her distress
o Sensory and contemporaneous observance of defendant’s acts does not necessarily require being able to see what is happening in order for third parties to recover for IIED