Under what condition may a defendant be liable for causing emotional harm to an individual’s close family member?

A defendant may be liable for causing emotional harm to an individual’s close family member when the conduct in question is extreme and outrageous. This principle is rooted in the understanding that certain behaviors can exceed the bounds of acceptable conduct and thus are more likely to inflict emotional distress, especially when the harm extends to those closely related to the victim.

To establish a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress for a family member, it’s crucial to demonstrate that the defendant’s actions were not just harmful but so wrongful that they caused significant emotional pain to those connected to the victim. This standard is set to balance the need for serious claims with the recognition that frivolous claims could arise from less severe actions.

While being physically harmed, witnessing the incident, or being in a different location may be relevant factors in some contexts of emotional distress claims, they do not define the conditions under which a defendant can be held liable for the emotional harm inflicted upon family members. The core tenet remains centered on the extremity and outrageous nature of the conduct itself, guiding the courts in determining liability for such claims.