Daley v. LaCroix case brief summary
F: P suffered emotional distress after D’s car crashed into P’s house, which was caused by D’s negligence.
TC ruled upon the ground that Michigan law denies recovery for negligenctly caused emotional disturbance absent a showing of physical impact. AC affirmed
R: Where a definite and objective physical injury is produced as a result of emotional distress proximately caused by D’s negligence, P may recover in damages for such physical consequences notwithstanding the absence of any physical impact upon P at the time of the mental shock.
C: reversed (rejected impact rule)
Co:
emotional distress GR: Only most closely connected people can recover pure emotional distress
but courts are more lenient than economic loss
F: P suffered emotional distress after D’s car crashed into P’s house, which was caused by D’s negligence.
TC ruled upon the ground that Michigan law denies recovery for negligenctly caused emotional disturbance absent a showing of physical impact. AC affirmed
R: Where a definite and objective physical injury is produced as a result of emotional distress proximately caused by D’s negligence, P may recover in damages for such physical consequences notwithstanding the absence of any physical impact upon P at the time of the mental shock.
C: reversed (rejected impact rule)
Co:
emotional distress GR: Only most closely connected people can recover pure emotional distress
but courts are more lenient than economic loss
No comments:
Post a Comment