 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Worsham v. Nix6/3/2003
ting Gautam v. DeLuca, 521 A.2d 1343 (N.J. Super. 1987)). See also Wehringer v. Powers & Hall, P.C., 874 F. Supp. 425 (D. Mass. 1995) (emotional distress damages may be recoverable in exceptional circumstances where an attorney's conduct is reckless and the resulting damage is foreseeable); cf. Lawrence v. Grinde, 534 N.W.2d 414, 421 (Iowa 1995) (emotional distress damages may be recoverable in a legal negligence action if the legal representation is "so coupled with matters of mental concern or solicitude, or with the sensibilities of the party to whom the duty is owed, that a breach of that duty will necessarily or reasonably result in mental anguish or suffering").
Here, Plaintiff presented evidence that Plaintiff and Michael retained Scroggs to end the workplace harassment, which Scroggs knew was taking an emotional toll on Michael. Scroggs also was aware that the emotional distress had become so severe that Michael had been forced to take time off from work and obtain mental health services. Yet, according to Plaintiff's evidence, Scroggs did little to nothing to represent Michael as he had promised. Indeed, as discussed previously, Plaintiff has raised the factual issue of whether Scroggs committed fraud when he misrepresented that he had contacted PSO and had filed a lawsuit. Under these facts, a jury could also reasonably infer that emotional distress was a natural and probable consequence of Scroggs' action. Therefore, Plaintiff's fraud cause of action may support recovery of emotional distress damages. See Cleveland, 2002 OK CIV APP 95, 57 P.3d 119 (deceit would support a claim for emotional distress damages); Coble, 1990 OK CIV APP 109, 809 P.2d 69 (cause of action for fraud would support claim for emotional distress damages); Mashunkashey, 1941 OK 113, 113 P.2d 190 (fraud in inducing one to enter into a bigamous marriage would support a claim for emotional distress damages).
Moreover, Plaintiff has raised the factual question of whether Scroggs committed legal negligence. If Plaintiff can further show that she or Michael suffered foreseeable emotional distress as a result of that negligence, and that the emotional distress caused physical injury , damages may be recoverable for the emotional distress. Ellington, 1986 OK 11, 8, 717 P.2d at 111.
CONCLUSION
Questions of fact preclude summary judgment on Plaintiff's claims of legal negligence, breach of contract, and fraud. Because Michael's suicide was not foreseeable and Scroggs' alleged negligence did not bring about delirium or insanity, Defendants cannot be held liable for Michael's suicide. However, questions of fact preclude summary judgment on Plaintiff's quest for emotional distress damages based on the theories of fraud or negligence.
AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.
COLBERT, V.C.J., and STUBBLEFIELD, J., concur.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Oklahoma Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|