Abstract
The Utah Supreme Court's decision in Johnson to recognize negligently inflicted emotional distress as a cause of action in Utah is a landmark progression to providing injured plaintiffs full compensation. Under the new cause of action, indirect victims, or bystanders, will not be allowed to recover for psychic injuries. Although practical policy considerations mandate such a limit on liability, plaintiffs that can establish direct victimization will be compensated fully. To satisfy the essential elements of the zone of danger rule a plaintiff must establish: (1) the plaintiff was within the zone of physical danger created by the defendant's negligence; (2) the plaintiff feared for his or her own safety, as opposed to the safety of a third party victim; and (3) the emotional distress suffered by the plaintiff resulted in bodily harm. With potentially large damage awards associated with the cause of action, practitioners will be inadequately representing clients if the cause of action is not appropriately pleaded.
Recommended Citation
Richards, Kevin M.
(1989)
"The Negligent Infection of Emotional Distress: A New Cause of Action in Utah,"
Utah Law Review: Vol. 1989:
No.
2, Article 7.
Available at:
https://dc.law.utah.edu/ulr/vol1989/iss2/7