Also known as: intentional infliction of emotional distress · negligent infliction of emotional distress · IIED · NIED · emotional distress
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A tort imposing liability when extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress to another. Liability extends to resulting bodily harm.
Ibrahim Iqbal's supervisor at Ideal Solutions locked him in a supply closet for hours while shouting insults about his family and heritage. Ibrahim developed severe anxiety requiring medical treatment. The supervisor's deliberate and extreme actions meet the threshold for liability.
Members of a church group picketed peacefully on public land outside a military funeral with signs expressing political and moral opposition to government policy. The deceased soldier's father suffered severe emotional distress from the signs. No additional unprotected conduct occurred, so tort liability is barred.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Ismael Ibrahim confronted and berated his neighbor with extreme insults in the presence of the neighbor's spouse, Iris Irons. Iris suffered severe emotional distress from witnessing the targeted outburst. The conduct directed at the third person supports liability to the immediate family member who was present.
Isaiah Ishikawa trespassed on Ivy Ibarra's property intending only to damage her fence. Ivy experienced emotional distress but no bodily harm or other invasion of protected interests beyond the trespass itself. The emotional distress alone does not create separate liability.
Igor Ito suffered a physical assault that also produced lasting anxiety and depression. Recovery includes compensation for both the bodily harm and the resulting emotional distress. The emotional component is recoverable as part of the overall personal injury damages.
Integrity Partners promised confidentiality to a source in exchange for information. After publishing the source's identity, the source experienced severe emotional distress from resulting public backlash. The claim proceeds under general applicability principles without First Amendment bar.
The conduct must exceed all bounds of decency and be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized community. Mere insults or annoyances fall short.
Supporting sources
Speech on matters of public concern receives special protection and bars tort liability absent additional unprotected conduct. Offensive but peaceful picketing at a public funeral illustrates this limit.
Supporting sources
Recovery is available to an immediate family member present at the time or to any other person present if bodily harm results. The actor must have intentionally or recklessly caused the distress.
Supporting sources
No separate recovery exists for emotional distress alone when the underlying conduct is tortious only because it was intended to cause bodily harm or invade other protected interests.
Supporting sources
A plaintiff whose personality interests are invaded may recover for both bodily harm and emotional distress as elements of compensatory damages.
Supporting sources
…to reputation was presumed and damages could be awarded by the jury, along with any special damages such as pecuniary loss and emotional distress. At the very least, the rule allowed the recovery of nominal damages for any defamatory publication actionable per se and thus performed "a vindicatory function by enabling the…