I’ve been wondering how someone proves emotional distress in a case for intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress. Like, what if something happened years ago and the plaintiff didn’t really feel distressed but suddenly starts going to therapy just before suing and claims that it’s all because of what the defendant did? Does that even hold up in court? Anybody have experience with this or know what’s needed?
Yeah, I’ve read that it’s not enough just to start therapy right before a lawsuit. The court usually looks for a history of distress, like medical or psychological treatment over time. You need to show that the defendant’s actions really caused it, not just say it happened out of nowhere.
In Pennsylvania, at least, if it’s negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED), the person has to show that they were either in danger or had a close relationship with someone who was injured. That’s part of the evidence they need to provide.
From what I understand, both claims (IIED and NIED) need to show real, severe distress. A therapist visit out of nowhere doesn’t usually cut it unless there’s long-term evidence backing it up.
I was curious about this too! Seems like courts would want a clear link between the distress and what happened, not just a random trigger before suing.
It also helps to have witnesses, like people who can say how the person was before and after the event. That can back up the claim that the defendant’s actions caused real distress.