Understanding Emotional Distress and Its Legal Implications in Oklahoma - Prof. Eugene Sen, Study notes of Communication

Download Understanding Emotional Distress and Its Legal Implications in Oklahoma - Prof. Eugene Sen and more Study notes Communication in PDF only on Docsity! 17-Emotional Distress Know the definitions and rules and how they are applied in Oklahoma. Be able to correctly recognize and apply them in hypothetical situations.  Three rationales for NOT recognizing the liability for intangible harm of emotional distress. o Difficulty of proving causation, danger of fraudulent claims and fear of a flood of litigation  What must a public figure or public official prove to win an intentional infliction of emotional distress lawsuit? ( Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, 1988 ) o Actual malice o The published item is sufficiently outrageous as to cause emotional harm and that it was published intentionally  Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress o In Oklahoma, do private figures frequently win infliction of emotional distress lawsuits against the media? Why?  No, because proving that the defendant’s conduct was “extreme and outrageous” and that the emotional distress suffered was severe serve as sizeable obstacles to plaintiffs o What is the statute of limitations for filing an infliction of emotional distress lawsuit in Oklahoma? Can that time limit be extended?  2 years  No o Why can't a company sue for infliction of emotional distress?  Companies cannot file such a lawsuit “because a corporation does not have feelings, and therefore cannot suffer emotional distress.” o What are the criteria required to prove intentional infliction of emotional distress?  1) the defendant acted intentionally  2) the defendant’s conduct was “extreme and outrageous”  3) the emotional distress was severe o According to the Oklahoma Supreme Court, this tort is an attempt to strike a balance between what?  “is an attempt to strike a medium between some of the merely unpleasant aspects of human interpersonal relation ships on the one hand and clearly unacceptable conduct on the other.” o Does the law attempt to protect people from "every intrusion into the psychic tranquility of an individual"?  No; “There is simply no room in the framework of our society for permitting one party to sue another on the event of every intrusion into the psychic tranquility of an individual"  “If recovery for damage done is to be afforded at all, there must be some test by which to weed out those suits premised on mere discord between individuals while preserving those where the conduct of individuals involved has clearly exceeded tolerable bounds of social deportment.” 1 o How do Oklahoma courts determine what is "extreme and outrageous behavior"? (senat page 107)  Conduct is so offensive “as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.”  Such conduct would arouse resentment from “average member of community” and prompt and an exclamation of “Outrageous!” o Be familiar with the examples and reasoning for what is or is not "extreme and outrageous behavior." Is "poor taste" equivalent to "extreme and outrageous behavior"?  Overview: Not every abusive outburst or emotional encounter falls under this category. Mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances and other trivialities are not considered extreme or outrageous. Actions which would amount resentment from an average member of the community fall under this category. It is the trial court’s responsibility to determine whether or not the defendant’s actions constitute extreme and outrageous behavior.  Ex/Not: A newspaper’s republication of material disseminated by a district attorney at a news conference was not extreme and outrageous behavior bc “fair and accurate media coverage of official public occasions is in the highest and best interest of the public,” the OK SC said.  Ex/Not: A radio talk show host had not acted in an extreme and outrageous behavior when he read a phone number over the air and urged listeners to call the number and complain. Zeran v. Diamond Broad., Inc..  Ex/ Not: Ex: Showler v. Harper’s Magazine – photographing OK Nat’l Guardsman’s body in an open casket not e&o. Big funeral, open to press, Gov. Brad Henry came. Peter Turnley – photo, published photo essay about US and Iraq. 2 realtives sued, i.i.e.d. .. but opening to public like that shows they wanted it to be known. Publishing w/out approval “in poor taste,” but not e&o.  No o Do Oklahoma courts consider mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances and petty oppressions to be extreme and outrageous conduct?  No  The conduct must amount to more than “mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty oppressions, or other trivialities o How do Oklahoma courts determine if "severe emotional distress" has occurred? Be familiar with the corresponding examples. To demonstrate severe emotional distress under Oklahoma law, the plaintiff should be able to demonstrate what?  OK trial court’s responsibility to initially determine if defendant’s conduct “may be reasonably regarded as sufficiently extreme and outrageous.” Only when reasonable people would disagree – jury 2