Presentation on theme: "1.On many occasions over an eight-month period, D repeatedly solicited P, a married person, to have sex. These included repeated telephone calls to Ps."— Presentation transcript:
1.On many occasions over an eight-month period, D repeatedly solicited P, a married person, to have sex. These included repeated telephone calls to Ps residence, including late at night, and on one occasion, going to Ps residence, where P witnessed Ds indecent exposure. P became extremely upset, concerned about bodily safety, consulted a psychiatrist for several months and took prescribed anti-anxiety medications for that period. On these facts, could the jury award damages for IIED?
A. No, provided that Ds purpose was not to cause P extreme emotional distress.
B. Yes, because anxiety is a physical reaction, as shown by the psychiatrists prescribing medication.
C. No, a solicitation for sex, however insulting, offensive or boorish it may be insufficient as a matter of law to support a claim for IIED.
D. Yes, provided that the jury finds that even if a single solicitation is not extreme and outrageous conduct, repeated solicitations and indecent exposure are.
2.P, a member of a minority group in the United States, alleges that D, Ps supervisor referred to P with a racial epithet in the presence of another supervisor, who laughed. P alleges becoming a nervous wreck, bursting into tears and having to run into the bathroom to regain composure. On two subsequent occasions the next week, D attempted to present P with a written apology, but P refused. On these facts, could a jury find for P on Ps claim for IIED?
A. Yes, because using a racial slur is rude, boorish, and substantially certain to cause the target to become upset and agitated.
B.No, because D twice attempted to apologize to P within a short time after the incident.
C.Yes, provided that D knew or should have known that P was particularly sensitive about race.
D.No, because P did not suffer extreme emotional disturbance.