Returning Subscriber?
Not a Subscriber to Litigation Pathfinder?
Get the full text of this legal issue, including links to cited primary law, along with unlimited access 1,000’s of other legal issues…and more!
Issue: Under Michigan law, what supports a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress?
| Area of Law: | Insurance Law, Personal Injury & Negligence |
| Keywords: | intentional infliction of emotional distress; Claim requirements |
| Jurisdiction: | Michigan |
| Cited Cases: | None |
| Cited Statutes: | None |
| Date: | 02/01/2001 |
“A claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress as a separate theory of recovery requires (1) extreme and outrageous conduct, (2) intent or recklessness, (3) causation, and (4) severe emotional distress.” Wendt v Auto Owners Ins Co, 156 Mich App 19; 401 NW2d 375, 378 (1986) (citing Roberts v Auto-Owners Ins Co, 422 Mich 594, 602; 374 NW2d 905, 911-12 (1985)). Summary disposition of these claims are inappropriate. See Maciejewski v Breitenbeck, 162 Mich App 410; 413 NW2d 65, 67 (1987) (trial court incorrectly ruled on summary disposition that intentional infliction of emotional distress tort was not recognized, as Roberts was carefully limited to dilatory handling of insurance claims; trial court’s ruling, however, was sustained on other grounds).
[…]