To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library





Vicarious Displeasure: Claims for Indirect Infliction of Emotional Distress and Loss of Consortium


Hamlet hit the nail on the head when he complained of the “thousand natural shocks that flesh is heir to.”[1] Even in a “civilized” society such as ours, life is fraught with stresses, anxieties, fears, and sorrows. Many are indeed natural shocks, the inevitable concomitants of unfolding human experience from birth to death (and let's not forget adolescence either). Much emotional distress, however, is inflicted upon us by other people as well, either deliberately or carelessly.

We live in a culture that attempts a legal response to most problems, probably too many problems, so it should not prove surprising that courts have been asked to fashion a remedy for emotional distress as well. This chapter considers the approaches courts have taken to one of tort law's most intractable problems, claims for indirect infliction of emotional distress. It then contrasts such claims with another type of claim for emotional injuries, loss of consortium.

Claims for indirect infliction of emotional distress (frequently referred to as “bystander” claims) are based on emotional trauma suffered by one person who witnesses or learns of an injury to another. Here are some examples:

A worker at a construction site sees a coworker crushed under a dump truck.

Please or Register to view full content.

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following