PJC General Negligence 2022

PJC 6.5

I NTENTIONAL P ERSONAL T ORTS

PJC 6.5

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

QUESTION ______ Did Don Davis intentionally inflict severe emotional distress on Paul Payne ? Intentional infliction of emotional distress occurs when the defendant acts intentionally or recklessly with extreme and outrageous conduct to cause the plaintiff emotional distress and the emotional distress suffered by the plaintiff was severe. “Extreme and outrageous conduct” occurs only where the conduct has been so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possi ble bounds of decency and to be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized community. Answer “Yes” or “No.” Answer: _______________ COMMENT When to use. PJC 6.5 is a broad-form question. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 277. It may be used if a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress is made. See PJC 33.2 regarding broad-form issues and the Casteel doctrine. The tort is a “gap-filler” judi cially created for the limited purpose of allowing recovery in those rare instances in which a defendant intentionally inflicts severe emotional distress in a manner so unusual that the victim has no other recognized theory of redress. Standard Fruit & Vegetable Co. v. Johnson , 985 S.W.2d 62, 68 (Tex. 1998); see also Creditwatch, Inc. v. Jackson , 157 S.W.3d 814, 816 (Tex. 2005); Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc. v. Zeltwanger , 144 S.W.3d 438, 447 (Tex. 2004). Source of question and instructions. The elements of intentional infliction of emotional distress are (1) the defendant acted intentionally or recklessly, (2) the con duct was extreme and outrageous, (3) the actions of the defendant caused the plaintiff emotional distress, and (4) the emotional distress suffered by the plaintiff was severe. Twyman v. Twyman , 855 S.W.2d 619, 621 (Tex. 1993). The courts have been reluctant to permit a cause of action relating to such conduct except in cases in which the con duct is so extreme in degree as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency and is regarded as atrocious and “utterly intolerable in a civilized community.” See Twyman , 855 S.W.2d at 621.

88