The Anatomy of Emotional Distress Claims in Minnesota

Abstract

This Article examines the right to recover damages for emotional distress in Minnesota, with emphasis on claims for negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The recovery of damages for emotional distress is subject to varying and perhaps seemingly inconsistent standards. After a brief history of emotional distress law, the Article will discuss claims for emotional distress based on negligence, intentional torts, and statutory violations. These areas are examined in detail to determine the standards for the recovery of emotional harm in Minnesota and to evaluate whether the standards are applied consistently. The Article also examines the right to recover damages for emotional distress in specific contexts, including contractual disputes, professional malpractice, and business torts.

Keywords: IIED, NIED, Minnesota Torts, Hubbard V. United Press International, Hubbard Standards, Defamation, Zone Of Danger, Emotional Injury, Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress, Mental Anguish