What Is An Emotional Distress Lawsuit?
An emotional distress claim is one based on emotional pain and suffering or mental anguish caused by a defendant’s negligence or intentional act. Emotional distress falls under the category of psychological injuries and these psychological injuries are legally recognized and actionable in most courts, especially if the emotional distress can be linked to physical injuries the defendant caused the victim because of negligence or intentional acts.
Emotion distress can also cover anxiety, embarrassment and rage, suicidal impulses, fear, insomnia, grief, fright, horror, and especially for children, mental and emotional illness that can manifest during or after the event that causes emotional distress such as a contractor’s negligence . Children are also affected by emotional distress involving stressors unrelated to them, subsequently suffering psychological effects. The American Psychiatric Association recognizes emotional distress as a condition that requires psychiatric treatment and includes the following signs and symptoms: An emotional distress claim is a battery or assault claim. In either case, a contractor has acted negligently or intentionally to cause distress or harm to your family. An experienced personal injury attorney can assist you prove the cause of emotional distress from the actions of contractors.
Lawsuit Grounds Against A Contractor
Contractors can be sued for emotional distress under a number of different circumstances. These will depend on the nature of the dispute with the contractor. A contractor who negligently causes property damage might, in rare cases, be held liable for the resulting emotional harm.
On the other hand, a contractor who deliberately lies to induce another to enter into a contract generally can be held responsible for emotional distress inflicted on the party tricked into doing business with him. A contractor’s lies and broken promises may amount to fraudulent misrepresentation and negligent misrepresentation. In some situations the contractor may be liable under the tort of intentional interference with contractual relations for emotional distress caused the victim’s spouse or family member.
Intentional interference with contract is a tort that can arise when a third-party non-contracting party intentionally induces one of the contracting parties to breach a contract. If the third-party non-contracting person is not a party to the contract, then he can be sued for intentional interference with contract. A successful claim can result in a lawsuit for emotional distress.
How Do You Prove Emotional Distress?
When a contractor crosses the line into causing emotional distress, the injured homeowner may be able to sue for this harm. However, recovering for emotional distress is not easy. Just as the defendant’s conduct must be extraordinary and outrageous for the plaintiff to have ground to sue, so too must the plaintiff’s proof of emotional distress.
The law places the burden on the plaintiff to prove emotional distress with sufficient certainty for the fact-finder to award damages on the basis of evidence that is more than remote, speculative, fictitious, or conjectural.
Plaintiffs have been denied recovery for extreme and severe emotional distress when their evidence consisted of reactions such as cried for an hour; got sick right after learning of the conduct; wanted to kill in order to get revenge; was infuriated; was disturbed and surprised; responded by throwing a tantrum; did not sleep because I was upset; started drinking heavily; lost weight; developed insomnia; had a nervous breakdown; attended therapy session to address the effects of the incident; burst into tears; and never wanted to see a stranger again.
On the other hand, it is possible to prove emotional distress when the plaintiff presents evidence of a change in personality (such as becoming bitter and vindictive); post-traumatic stress disorder diagnosed by a psychologist; physical injury (such as loss of consciousness) caused by the incident; nightmares; and adverse impact on urination due to emotional trauma.
Plaintiffs can be awarded damages for emotional distress if they are able to provide evidence such as medical testimony of emotional distress and treatment; a diary established soon after the incident which reflects the plaintiff’s emotional responses; and an independent expert testimony of emotional distress and treatment for at least some of the period between the incident and trial.
For example, in the California case of Lazaroff v. Capitol Ins. Group, a plaintiff sued an insurance company over the handling of a claim. The plaintiff provided evidence that after being notified that he could no longer pursue his lawsuit over his claim, he had an emotional meltdown; his wife described him as "miserable and angry." He was unable to sleep, ate constantly to keep calm, constantly paced the floor, and repeated over and over "I want to kill those dirty bastards." His employer noted a "definite change" in the plaintiff’s personality which "seemed borderline psychotic" and "out of control" and documented concerns about whether the plaintiff could perform his job responsibilities.
The plaintiff’s therapist testified that the plaintiff suffered from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, major depression, and anxiety. He recommended cognitive therapy, but the plaintiff "choose[d] to be angry and chose not to follow up on it." Because the plaintiff’s evidence reflected a change in personality and demonstrated the plaintiff’s decision not to receive treatment, the court found that the plaintiff sufficiently proved his emotional distress and awarded him damages.
Obstacles When Pursuing A Lawsuit
Plaintiffs can often face a number of challenges when bringing a lawsuit against a contractor for infliction of emotional distress. One common issue is the difficulty in proving that the contractor’s actions were especially egregious. Generally, merely doing a bad job is not enough – the conduct must be extreme and outrageous, going beyond the inappropriateness of the context of the building project and venturing into the realm of premeditated and intentional torture of the homeowner. If the contractor’s conduct is deemed extreme and outrageous, the homeowner can then proceed with proving that the actions caused him or her severe emotional distress.
Another challenge is proving that the claims are not legitimate, but are instead an attempt to simply get back at a contractor for failing to complete the project as agreed. Contractors will rely on the outside influence of homeowners, such as any possible outside relationships with individuals in the community, past history with the homeowner, or pre-existing bad blood with the homeowner’s friends and family, as evidence that the claim against them lacks legitimacy and may be malicious.
A potential defense to the claim is that the breach of contract did not rise to the level of being so extreme that the emotional distress claim should be allowed. Additionally, the contractor can argue that no reasonable person would have experienced emotional distress from the conduct. Finally, the contractor can assert that the emotional distress did not rise to the level of severity required for a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, which must show that the distress was severe and caused either bodily harm or was sufficiently severe itself.
The Role of An Attorney
When considering a lawsuit for emotional distress against a contractor, seeking legal advice is crucial. A lawyer experienced in construction law and emotional distress claims can provide valuable insights into the viability of the claim and guide the plaintiff through the complexities of legal proceedings . One added benefit to having an attorney on your side is they will handle all of the communications with your contractor as well as other involved parties. This ensures that you will not make any statement that may be used against you. Having an experienced attorney will also ensure that you do not miss any deadlines for filing the lawsuit.
Threshold Options to Explore
If you are not interested in pursuing a lawsuit, you do have some alternatives. First, I believe that most cases of emotional distress are settled before they reach lawsuit proportions, so don’t be afraid to try to work it out first if possible. Usually a few words will let the contractor know that you are unhappy and he was neglectful.
Second, there is mediation. If you cannot resolve a matter, you may wish to consider mediation. This is a process where a neutral person will assist you in working out an agreement with the contractor. It is usually faster than going to court and can be less expensive. The mediator will not make a decision for you, but only suggest ideas and proposes a settlement. If that doesn’t work, you can then take further steps if necessary.
Third option is arbitration. Arbitration is similar to a lawsuit in that you will present your case to a neutral party- arbitrator- who will listen to your side as well as the contractor’s side and then he will render a decision. This too is usually less expensive than going to court. Although with arbitration, if you present both sides to an arbitrator, he will be known to side with either you or your contractor based on who is right and who is wrong. So, if you have a valid claim for emotional distress, the arbitrator is probably going to side with you. For this reason, there are very few cases of emotional distress taken to arbitration and even fewer that end up with the contractor winning.
So if all else fails after you have your contract with a contractor, you can consider litigation, but if you believe that going to a lawyer and filing suit will help, let’s talk.
Scenarios In Practice
One of the most closely watched cases in this area is Doe v. Kohn Nast & Graf, P.C., et al. Here, the Pennsylvania Superior Court found that a child could sue a lawyer for severe emotional distress when the lawyer in a sexual abuse case revealed the identity of the child and family to the abuser’s family. The court reasoned that the revelation was intentional and volitional.
A more recent unreported case from another jurisdiction involves a surviving plaintiff who claims emotional distress stemming from his wife’s death after a contractor failed to finish framing a "decking" project . Without a finish on the wood, decay (rot) began and subsequently rendered the deck unsafe. The plaintiff claimed to be in the process of hiring a new contractor when the second contractor fell through and the plaintiff’s wife fell through the decking and suffered fatal injuries. The plaintiff alleged that he suffered emotional distress when his wife died as a result of the unsafe decking. The Maryland Court of Appeals upheld a summary judgment ruling in favor of the contractor, finding that the contractor owed no duty to prevent the risk of harm a to the plaintiff’s wife.