Is a workplace supervisor who ridicules a subordinate liable for a tort and damages for extreme distress suffered by his subordinate as the result of intentional infliction of emotional distress?
Under instructions in California Jury Instructions, Civil: Book of Approved Jury Instructions (740), the essential elements of a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress are: 1) the defendant engaged in outrageous conduct;
2a) the defendant intended to cause the plaintiff to suffer emotional distress; 2b1) the defendant engaged in the conduct with reckless disregard of the probability of causing plaintiff to suffer emotional distress; 2b2) the plaintiff was present at the time the outrageous conduct occurred; 2b3) the defendant knew that the plaintiff was present; 3) the plaintiff suffered severe emotional distress; and 4) such outrageous conduct of the defendant was a cause of the emotional distress suffered by the plaintiff.
Further, the term "emotional distress" means mental distress, suffering, or anguish. It includes highly unpleasant mental reactions such as fright, nervousness, grief, anxiety, worry, mortification, or humiliation. Juries are further instructed in such instances to explore the severity of the distress claimed by the plaintiff with respect to intensity and duration. Extreme and outrageous conduct exceeds the bounds of decency and is conduct which would cause an average member of the community to immediately react in outrage. Such conduct may arise from the defendant's knowledge that a plaintiff is particularly susceptible to emotional distress by reason of some physical or mental condition or peculiarity. Further, when the defendant proceeds with the conduct in the knowledge that its effect is likely to be peculiarly felt by the plaintiff, it is even more extreme and outrageous.
Extreme and outrageous conduct defined in this manner represents a tort for which a plaintiff may re
...