Study guide
18.1 Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
California First-Year Law Students' Examination Baby Bar
Track your progress as you read
Finished sections get a check mark.
1 Introduction & FYLSE Examination Guide
1.1 FYLSE Exam Structure, Passing Standard & Administration 1.2 Study Method, Pacing & MBE-Style Technique
2 Contracts: Mutual Assent, Capacity & Contract Formation
2.1 The Offer & Objective Theory of Assent 2.2 Termination & Irrevocability of Offers 2.3 Acceptance & the Mailbox Rule 2.4 Mirror Image Rule & UCC 2-207 Battle of the Forms 2.5 Mistake in Contract Formation 2.6 Fraud, Duress, Undue Influence & Illegality 2.7 Capacity to Contract
3 Contracts: Consideration, Estoppel & Implied Obligations
3.1 Consideration & the Bargained-For Exchange 3.2 Past & Moral Consideration, Pre-Existing Duty & Modification 3.3 Promissory Estoppel & Detrimental Reliance 3.4 Implied-in-Fact Contracts & Quasi-Contract 3.5 Implied Covenant of Good Faith, Fair Dealing & Indefinite Terms
4 Contracts: Third-Party Beneficiaries, Assignment & Delegation
4.1 Third-Party Beneficiary Contracts 4.2 Assignment of Rights 4.3 Delegation of Duties
5 Contracts: Statute of Frauds, Parol Evidence & Interpretation
5.1 Statute of Frauds: Contracts Within the Statute 5.2 Satisfying the Statute: Writing, Signature & Exceptions 5.3 The Parol Evidence Rule 5.4 Contract Interpretation & Canons of Construction
6 Contracts: Performance, Conditions, UCC Warranties & Breach
6.1 Conditions: Express, Constructive & Excuse 6.2 Substantial Performance vs. Perfect Tender 6.3 Cure, Rejection, Revocation & Installment Contracts 6.4 UCC Article 2 Warranties & Risk of Loss 6.5 Anticipatory Repudiation & Insecurity
7 Contracts: Remedies, Discharge & Changed Circumstances
7.1 Expectation Damages & Their Limitations 7.2 Reliance, Restitution & Liquidated Damages 7.3 Specific Performance & Injunctive Relief 7.4 UCC Article 2 Buyer's and Seller's Remedies 7.5 Impossibility, Impracticability & Frustration of Purpose 7.6 Discharge by Agreement: Rescission, Novation & Accord and Satisfaction
8 Criminal Law: Principles of Criminal Liability & Mens Rea
8.1 Actus Reus, Voluntary Acts & Omissions 8.2 Criminal Causation & Intervening Causes 8.3 Common Law & Model Penal Code Mens Rea 8.4 Mistake of Fact, Mistake of Law & Concurrence
9 Criminal Law: Inchoate Offenses & Accomplice Liability
9.1 Criminal Attempt & Impossibility 9.2 Solicitation & the Merger Doctrine 9.3 Conspiracy & Merger Doctrine 9.4 Accomplice Liability: Actus Reus & Mens Rea 9.5 Scope of Accomplice Liability, Withdrawal & Parties to Crime
10 Criminal Law: Homicide & Crimes Against the Person
10.1 Common Law Murder & Malice Aforethought 10.2 Degrees of Murder, Premeditation & Deliberation 10.3 The Felony Murder Rule & Its Limitations 10.4 Voluntary & Involuntary Manslaughter 10.5 Non-Homicide Crimes Against the Person
11 Criminal Law: Property Crimes, Theft & Habitation
11.1 Common Law Larceny 11.2 Embezzlement & False Pretenses 11.3 Robbery & Extortion 11.4 Receiving Stolen Property 11.5 Burglary 11.6 Arson
12 Criminal Law: Defenses: Capacity, Justification & Excuse
12.1 Insanity: The Four Legal Tests 12.2 Intoxication, Diminished Capacity & Infancy 12.3 Self-Defense & Defense of Others 12.4 Defense of Property, Habitation & Law Enforcement Privileges 12.5 Duress & Necessity 12.6 Entrapment & Mistake as an Excuse
13 Torts: Intentional Torts to Persons & Property
13.1 Intent, Motive & Incapacity in Intentional Torts 13.2 Transferred Intent 13.3 Battery & Assault 13.4 False Imprisonment 13.5 Trespass to Land 13.6 Trespass to Chattels & Conversion
14 Torts: Privileges & Defenses to Intentional Torts
14.1 Consent: Express, Implied & Capacity 14.2 Exceeding & Vitiating Consent 14.3 Self-Defense & Defense of Others (Tort) 14.4 Defense of Property & Recapture of Chattels 14.5 Public & Private Necessity 14.6 The Shopkeeper's Privilege
15 Torts: Negligence — Duty of Care & Breach
15.1 Duty of Care & the Foreseeable Plaintiff 15.2 Affirmative Duties to Act & Special Relationships 15.3 Standard of Care: The Reasonable Person & Children 15.4 Professional Negligence, Informed Consent & Negligence Per Se 15.5 Land Possessor Liability & Premises Duties 15.6 Breach of Duty & Res Ipsa Loquitur
16 Torts: Causation, Defenses, Multiple Tortfeasors, Wrongful Death & Damages
16.1 Cause in Fact & Multiple Actors 16.2 Proximate Cause & Intervening Forces 16.3 Contributory, Comparative Negligence & Assumption of Risk 16.4 Joint and Several Liability, Contribution & Indemnity 16.5 Vicarious Liability & Non-Delegable Duties 16.6 Wrongful Death & Survival Actions 16.7 Statute of Limitations & Claim Accrual 16.8 Tort Damages: Compensatory, Nominal, Punitive & Mitigation
17 Torts: Strict Liability & Products Liability
17.1 Strict Liability for Animals 17.2 Abnormally Dangerous Activities & Scope of Risk 17.3 Strict Products Liability & Defect Categories 17.4 Products Liability Under Negligence, Warranty & Misrepresentation 17.5 Defenses to Products Liability
18 Torts: Emotional Distress, Defamation, Privacy & Economic Torts
18.1 Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 18.2 Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress 18.3 Common Law Defamation: Elements, Libel & Slander 18.4 Constitutional Limits, Privileges & Defenses to Defamation 18.5 Invasion of Privacy 18.6 Nuisance & Economic Torts
18.1 Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
Key Takeaways Explain This Topic AI
IIED requires extreme and outrageous conduct, intent or recklessness as to causing distress, causation, and severe emotional distress.
Conduct is extreme and outrageous where it exceeds all bounds tolerated in a civilised society, and mere insults, indignities, or annoyances do not qualify.
Ordinary conduct can become outrageous where the defendant abuses a position of authority, targets a known vulnerable plaintiff such as a child or pregnant woman, or exploits a known sensitivity.
The distress must be severe, and unlike the other intentional torts IIED requires actual damages, with no nominal recovery available.
Transferred intent does not apply to IIED, so a bystander plaintiff must generally be present, be a close relative of the victim, and have their presence known to the defendant, or else prove bodily harm resulting from the distress.
Last updated: September 2026
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
Exam Snapshot: Emotional distress torts appear frequently on the California First-Year Law Students' Examination (FYLSE). The examiners routinely test the sharp doctrinal boundaries between Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED) and Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress (NIED) . Examinees must master two recurring testing pivots: (1) the mental state requirement (IIED permits recklessness, which distinguishes it from all other intentional torts, whereas NIED requires negligence), and (2) the damage thresholds (IIED requires severe distress without requiring physical symptoms, whereas traditional NIED demands objective physical manifestation). Furthermore, bystander recovery rules under both torts feature strict multi-element tests designed to prevent fraudulent or unlimited claims.
1. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED)
Historically, the common law refused to recognize standalone claims for mental anguish unless the emotional suffering accompanied an independent, established physical tort (known as "parasitic damages" appended to battery, assault, or false imprisonment). During the mid-twentieth century, the American Law Institute formulated Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress to bridge this gap, establishing a cause of action for purely psychic injury caused by intolerable misconduct ( Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46 ).
Prima Facie Elements of IIED
To establish a prima facie cause of action for IIED, the plaintiff must prove four distinct legal elements by a preponderance of the evidence: [ Extreme & Outrageous Conduct ] + [ Intent or Recklessness ] + [ Causation ] + [ Severe Emotional Distress ] = IIED Liability
Element Common Law Definition & Legal Benchmark Bar Exam Traps & Nuances
1. Outrageous Conduct Conduct so extreme in degree as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized community. Mere insults, bad manners, profanities, name-calling, and petty indignities are insufficient as a matter of law .
2. Mental State The actor acted with the specific desire to cause severe emotional distress, knew with substantial certainty that it would result, or acted with reckless disregard of a high risk of causing distress. Recklessness satisfies IIED . It is the only intentional tort on the FYLSE where conscious disregard of a high risk substitutes for purpose or substantial certainty.
3. Causation The defendant's conduct was the actual (but-for) and proximate cause of the plaintiff's distress. Pre-existing emotional distress must be aggravated or superseded by defendant's specific acts.
4. Severe Distress Emotional distress of such substantial quantity and enduring quality that no reasonable person in a civilized society could be expected to endure it. Physical symptoms or bodily harm are NOT required for IIED at common law (unlike traditional NIED).
Doctrinal Breakdown: Extreme & Outrageous Conduct
The core battleground in an IIED claim is whether the defendant's behavior crosses the high legal threshold of "extreme and outrageous." The standard is purely objective: would an average member of the community, upon hearing the facts, exclaim, "Outrageous!" ( Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46, comment d ).
The Rule of Non-Actionable Insults
The law expects citizens to have reasonably thick skins. Liability never attaches for mere insults, bad manners, hurtful slurs, offensive name-calling, petty oppressions, or trivial indignities alone. Even if the speaker acts with malicious subjective intent to wound the plaintiff's feelings, offensive speech without more is legally non-actionable.
Four Aggravating Factors That Transform Conduct into Outrageousness
Conduct that would otherwise be classified as mere insults or ordinary dispute can become actionable outrageous conduct if one or more recognized aggravating factors are present:
Abuse of a Position of Power or Authority: When the defendant occupies a position of legal, economic, or custodial leverage over the plaintiff and abuses that authority to intimidate, demean, or coerce the victim. Recognized relationships include:
- Landlords harassing vulnerable tenants to coerce illegal self-help evictions;
- Employers engaging in sustained, humiliating workplace hazing or predatory coercion;
Creditors and commercial debt collection agencies utilizing abusive, threatening, late-night collection tactics;
Police officers or security guards abusing badge authority to terrorize citizens.
Exploitation of Known Vulnerability: If the defendant possesses actual knowledge that the plaintiff suffers from a specific, peculiar susceptibility or fragility—such as advanced age, young childhood, pregnancy, or a diagnosed cardiac or psychiatric disorder—and deliberately targets or exploits that vulnerability, conduct that is otherwise ordinary becomes extreme and outrageous.
Continuous, Repetitive Conduct: A single isolated insult or offensive remark is non-actionable. However, continuous, repetitive harassment conducted over weeks or months (such as stalking, repeated midnight hang-up calls, or relentless public ridicule) crosses the threshold into actionable outrageousness.
Special Status Defendants (Common Carriers & Innkeepers): Common carriers (airlines, passenger trains, municipal transit) and commercial innkeepers (hotels, motels) owe a special public utility duty to their patrons. In traditional jurisdictions, common carriers and innkeepers are liable for gross, unprovoked insults directed at paying passengers or guests, even if the conduct falls short of extreme and outrageousness required for private citizens.
The Damage Element: Severe Emotional Distress
To recover, the plaintiff must prove that the emotional distress suffered was severe :
Intensity and Duration: The distress must be substantial, debilitating, and enduring rather than transient or minor (e.g., profound depression, disabling panic attacks, chronic insomnia, inability to work or engage in daily life activities, necessity of psychiatric medical intervention).
Physical Manifestation Not Required: A critical bar examination rule: bodily harm or objective physical symptoms are NOT required to sustain an IIED action. While evidence of physical symptoms (e.g., ulcers, vomiting, weight loss) is admissible to corroborate the severity of distress, psychic suffering alone satisfies the damage element.
Bystander Recovery for IIED (Conduct Directed at a Third Party)
When an actor directs extreme and outrageous conduct at a third party (such as brutally assaulting or murdering someone in the presence of others), a bystander who witnesses the event can recover for IIED only under strict Restatement rules ( Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46(2) ): Defendant Directs Outrageous Conduct at Third Party
- ├── Category A: Plaintiff is an Immediate Family Member
- │ ├── Must be present at the scene at the time of the conduct; AND
- │ ├── Defendant must have actual knowledge of plaintiff's presence; AND
│ └── Plaintiff suffers severe emotional distress (NO bodily harm required).
- └── Category B: Plaintiff is a Non-Relative Bystander
- ├── Must be present at the scene at the time of the conduct; AND
- ├── Defendant must have actual knowledge of plaintiff's presence; AND
└── Plaintiff must suffer severe emotional distress that RESULTS IN BODILY HARM.
Exam Tip: On the FYLSE, verify whether the defendant had actual knowledge of the bystander's presence. If a defendant beats a husband to death in an alleyway, unaware that the victim's wife is hiding silently behind a dumpster fifty feet away, the wife cannot recover for bystander IIED because the defendant lacked knowledge of her presence, defeating the required mental state of intent or recklessness toward her.