239 N.J. Super. 139 - Burbridge v. Paschal’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 16 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Generally speaking, to establish a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress, the plaintiff must establish intentional and outrageous conduct by the defendant, proximate cause, and distress that is severe. Initially, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant acted intentionally or recklessly. For an intentional act to result in liability, the defendant must intend both to do the act and to produce emotional distress. Liability will also attach when the defendant acts recklessly in deliberate disregard of a high degree of probability that emotional distress will follow. "Second, the defendant’s conduct must be extreme and outrageous. The conduct must be ‘so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond ah possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.' Third, the defendant’s actions must have been the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s emotional distress. Fourth, the emotional distress suffered by the plaintiff must be ‘so severe that no reasonable man could be expected to endure it.’ By circumscribing the cause of action with an elevated threshold for liability and damages, courts have authorized legitimate claims while eliminating those that should not be compensable. "The severity of the emotional distress raises questions of both law and fact. Thus, the court decides whether as a matter of law such emotional distress can be found, and the jury decides whether it has in fact”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Clift v. Narragansett Television L.P.

2. “We have certainly some emotional distress. I don’t doubt that ... We do have a situation where it seemed that the Plaintiffs were able to live with the problem fairly well. Although there’s no question that it was an annoyance and bothersome and caused them upset, that type of thing. I think the evidence is not sufficient on the severe emotional aspect to send this cause of action to the Jury. Id.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 745 F. Supp. 1029 - Lacy v. Cooper Hospital/University Medical Center

3. “a preponderance of evidence burden ... [was] sufficient in a civil case.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 313 N.J. Super. 257 - Harris v. Peridot Chem.(NJ), Inc.