50 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1973–2025 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Indiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Shuamber v. Hendersongreen2 sentences2012In Shuamber v. Henderson, 579 N.E.2d 452, 456 (Ind.1991), however, our supreme court modified the impact rule, holding that when: A plaintiff sustains a direct impact by the negligence of another and, by virtue of that direct involvement sustains an emotional trauma which is serious in nature and of a kind and extent normally expected to occur in a reasonable person[,] ... such a plaintiff is entitled to maintain an action to recover for that emotional trauma without regard to whether the emotional trauma arises out of or accompanies any physical injury to the plaintiff. 2011Because we concluded that “the rationale for [the impact rule], whatever its historical foundation, is no longer valid,” id. at 455 (quoting Cullison, 570 N.E.2d at 30 ), we relaxed the requirements of the impact rule. | 11 | 23 |
Ryan v. Browngreen2 sentences2012See Ryan v. Brown, 827 N.E.2d 112, 119 (Ind.Ct.App.2005). 2009See Ryan v. Brown, 827 N.E.2d 112, 119 (Ind.Ct.App.2005). | 2 | 3 |
Alexander v. Scheidgreen2 sentences2011Actions for emotional distress were originally limited by the impact rule, which required: “(1) an impact on the plaintiff; (2) that causes physical injury to the plaintiff; (3) that in turn causes the emotional distress.” Alexander v. Scheid, 726 N.E.2d 272, 283 (Ind.2000) (explaining the genesis of the impact rule). 2002Alexander v. Scheid, 726 N.E.2d 272, 283 (Ind.2000). | 2 | 3 |
Gorman v. I & M Elec. Co., Inc.green2 sentences1998Since Shuamber , this court has stated that the modified impact rule “maintains the requirement that [the plaintiff] demonstrate that she suffered a direct physical impact.” Etienne v. Caputi, 679 N.E.2d 922, 926 (Ind.Ct.App.1997)(quoting Gorman v. I & M Electric Co., Inc., 641 N.E.2d 1288, 1290 (Ind.Ct.App.1994), trans. denied); see Miller v. May, 656 N.E.2d 1198, 1200 (Ind.Ct.App.1995), trans. denied. 1998See Gorman, 641 N.E.2d at 1291 (allowing plaintiff to recover for fear of injury that did not occur, but might have happened, would effectively abolish the impact rule). | 2 | 3 |
Kush v. Lloydgreen2 sentences2023And this makes sense, as “the impact doctrine . . . generally is inapplicable to recognized torts in which damages often are predominantly emotional, such as defamation or invasion of privacy.” Kush v. Lloyd, 616 So. 2d 415, 422 (Fla. 1992). 1997See Kush, 616 So.2d 415 . | 2 | 2 |
Pieters v. B-Right Trucking, Inc.green2 sentences1997Unlike the plaintiffs in Shuamber and Pieters v. B-Right, 669 F.Supp. 1463 (N.D.Ind.1987), Etienne does not claim emotional damages as a result of seeing a loved one’s traumatic death. 1991Little, supra; see also Pieters v. B-Right Trucking, Inc. (N.D.Ind.1987), 669 F.Supp. 1463, 1467 . | 1 | 3 |
Delta Airlines v. Cookgreen2 sentences2006See, e.g., Delta Airlines, 821 N.E.2d at 401 (asserting that the reasoning underlying this Court's decision to eliminate the physical injury requirement *997 under the impact rule "also supports eliminating the physical impact requirement under the modified impact rule"); Ketchmark v. N. Ind. Pub. 2005In Delta Airlines v. Cook, 816 N.E.2d 448 (Ind.Ct.App.2004), aff'd upon reh'g, 821 N.E.2d 400 (Ind.Ct.App.2005), the court further backed away from a strict enforcement of the impact rule. | 1 | 2 |
Kalen v. Terre Haute & Indianapolis Railroadgreen2 sentences1984R.R. (1897), 18 Ind.App. 202 , 47 N.E. 694 ." Walters requests that we overrule existing precedent and reject the impact rule for negligent infliction of emotional distress. 5 We decline the offer. 1984R.R. (1897), 18 Ind.App. 202 , 47 N.E. 694 ." Walters requests that we overrule existing precedent and reject the impact rule for negligent infliction of emotional distress. 5 We decline the offer. | 1 | 2 |
Eakin v. Kumiegagreen1 sentence2023From this it follows that such noncompensable injuries are not subject to payment from the Fund.” 567 N.E.2d at 153 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
Marley v. Stategreen1 sentence2020See id. [13] Nonetheless, Walker likens the impact on his defense by the exclusion of testimony about Taylor to the situation in Hyser, 996 N.E.2d at 443 . | 1 | 1 |
Timothy L. Hyser v. State of Indianagreen1 sentence2020See id. [13] Nonetheless, Walker likens the impact on his defense by the exclusion of testimony about Taylor to the situation in Hyser, 996 N.E.2d at 443 . | 1 | 1 |
Atlantic Coast Airlines v. Cookgreen2 sentences2007Coast Airlines v. Cook, 857 N.E.2d 989, 997 (Ind.2006). 2007Coast Airlines v. Cook, 857 N.E.2d 989, 997 (Ind.2006). | 1 | 1 |
Etienne v. Caputigreen2 sentences1998Since Shuamber , this court has stated that the modified impact rule “maintains the requirement that [the plaintiff] demonstrate that she suffered a direct physical impact.” Etienne v. Caputi, 679 N.E.2d 922, 926 (Ind.Ct.App.1997)(quoting Gorman v. I & M Electric Co., Inc., 641 N.E.2d 1288, 1290 (Ind.Ct.App.1994), trans. denied); see Miller v. May, 656 N.E.2d 1198, 1200 (Ind.Ct.App.1995), trans. denied. 1998Since Shuamber , this court has stated that the modified impact rule "maintains the requirement that [the plaintiff] demonstrate that she suffered a direct physical impact." Etienne v. Caputi, 679 N.E.2d 922, 926 (Ind.Ct.App.1997)(quoting Gorman v. I & M Electric Co., Inc., 641 N.E.2d 1288, 1290 (Ind.Ct.App.1994), trans. denied ); see Miller v. May, 656 N.E.2d 1198, 1200 (Ind.Ct.App. 1995), trans. denied. | 1 | 1 |
Miller v. Maygreen2 sentences1998Since Shuamber , this court has stated that the modified impact rule “maintains the requirement that [the plaintiff] demonstrate that she suffered a direct physical impact.” Etienne v. Caputi, 679 N.E.2d 922, 926 (Ind.Ct.App.1997)(quoting Gorman v. I & M Electric Co., Inc., 641 N.E.2d 1288, 1290 (Ind.Ct.App.1994), trans. denied); see Miller v. May, 656 N.E.2d 1198, 1200 (Ind.Ct.App.1995), trans. denied. 1998Since Shuamber , this court has stated that the modified impact rule "maintains the requirement that [the plaintiff] demonstrate that she suffered a direct physical impact." Etienne v. Caputi, 679 N.E.2d 922, 926 (Ind.Ct.App.1997)(quoting Gorman v. I & M Electric Co., Inc., 641 N.E.2d 1288, 1290 (Ind.Ct.App.1994), trans. denied ); see Miller v. May, 656 N.E.2d 1198, 1200 (Ind.Ct.App. 1995), trans. denied. | 1 | 1 |
Williams v. Bakergreen2 sentences1998See, e.g., Williams v. Baker, 572 A.2d 1062 (D.C.1990), where the court stated: "We are fortified in our decision to forego the requirement of an impact by the conviction that the connection between mere physical impact and mental injury is tenuous. 1998See, e.g., Williams v. Baker, 572 A.2d 1062 (D.C.1990), where the court stated: "We are fortified in our decision to forego-the requirement of an impact by the conviction that the connection between mere physical imT pact and mental injury is tenuous. | 1 | 1 |
| Bader v. Johnsonyellow | 1 | 1 |
| Cullison v. Medleygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Cullison v. Medley
green
2 sentences2011Because we concluded that “the rationale for [the impact rule], whatever its historical foundation, is no longer valid,” id. at 455 (quoting Cullison, 570 N.E.2d at 30 ), we relaxed the requirements of the impact rule. 1996The impact rule provided that “damages for mental anguish are recoverable only when accompanied by and resulting from a physical injury.” Cullison v. Medley, 559 N.E.2d 619, 621 (Ind.Ct.App.1990), overruled on transfer, 570 N.E.2d 27 (1991). | 6 | 1993–2011 |
Charlie Stuart Oldsmobile, Inc. v. Smith
green
2 sentences1984In Charlie Stuart Oldsmobile, Inc. v. Smith, (1976) 171 Ind.App. 315 , 357 N.E.2d 247 , modified upon rehearing, (1977) 175 Ind.App. 1 , 369 N.E.2d 947 , trans. denied, this court made the following observation regarding the exception to the impact rule: The Indiana cases are consistent with most other jurisdictions which allow recovery for mental anguish as an element of compensatory damages in an action for injury to personal property only if the act occasioning the injury was inspired by fraud, malice, or like motives, involving intentional conduct. 1984In Charlie Stuart Oldsmobile, Inc. v. Smith, (1976) 171 Ind.App. 315 , 357 N.E.2d 247 , modified upon rehearing, (1977) 175 Ind.App. 1 , 369 N.E.2d 947 , trans. denied, this court made the following observation regarding the exception to the impact rule: The Indiana cases are consistent with most other jurisdictions which allow recovery for mental anguish as an element of compensatory damages in an action for injury to personal property only if the act occasioning the injury was inspired by fraud, malice, or like motives, involving intentional conduct. | 3 | 1984–1991 |
Charlie Stuart Oldsmobile, Inc. v. Smith
green
2 sentences1984In Charlie Stuart Oldsmobile, Inc. v. Smith, (1976) 171 Ind.App. 315 , 357 N.E.2d 247 , modified upon rehearing, (1977) 175 Ind.App. 1 , 369 N.E.2d 947 , trans. denied, this court made the following observation regarding the exception to the impact rule: The Indiana cases are consistent with most other jurisdictions which allow recovery for mental anguish as an element of compensatory damages in an action for injury to personal property only if the act occasioning the injury was inspired by fraud, malice, or like motives, involving intentional conduct. 1984In Charlie Stuart Oldsmobile, Inc. v. Smith, (1976) 171 Ind.App. 315 , 357 N.E.2d 247 , modified upon rehearing, (1977) 175 Ind.App. 1 , 369 N.E.2d 947 , trans. denied, this court made the following observation regarding the exception to the impact rule: The Indiana cases are consistent with most other jurisdictions which allow recovery for mental anguish as an element of compensatory damages in an action for injury to personal property only if the act occasioning the injury was inspired by fraud, malice, or like motives, involving intentional conduct. | 3 | 1984–1991 |
Little v. Williamson
green
2 sentences1991An exception to the rule exists for certain tort cases involving the intentional infliction of emotional distress, Cullison, supro; Little, supra, but Indiana has not yet recognized an exception to the impact rule for the negligent infliction of emotional distress. 1990The impact rule provides that “damages for emotional distress are recoverable only when accompanied by and resulting from a physical injury.” Little v. Williamson (1982), Ind.App., 441 N.E.2d 974, 975 . | 3 | 1984–1991 |
Blackwell v. Dykes Funeral Homes, Inc.
green
2 sentences2005Id. 2004The continuing effort to articulate an evolving definition of what remains of the "impact rule" has resulted in the anomalous situation in this state of a claim being recognized for mental anguish suffered by parents resulting from the loss of their deceased child's remains, see Blackwell, 771 N.E.2d 692 , but the denial of a parent's claim for emotional trauma resulting from the loss of a live child, see Ritchhart v. Indpls. | 2 | 2004–2005 |
F. John Rogers, as Personal Representative of Paul Michalik, and R. David Boyer, Trustee of the Bankruptcy Estate of Jerry Lee Chambers v. Angela Martin and Brian Paul Brothers
green
2 sentences2017In Rogers v. Martin, 63 N.E.3d 316 (Ind. 2016), a homeowner’s boyfriend got into a fight.with a guest at their house party, and the guest was injured. 2017However, our supreme court recently handed down two cases regarding the duty of landowners that have an impact on the analysis in this case. [15] In Rogers v. Martin, 63 N.E.3d 316 (Ind. 2016), a homeowner’s boyfriend got into a fight with a guest at their house party, and the guest was injured. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Indiana Patient's Compensation Fund v. Winkle
green
1 sentence2011Id. at 5 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Conder v. Wood
green
1 sentence2011We found the impact requirement satisfied by the plaintiffs pounding, id. at 435 , noting that an impact need not be initiated by the tortfeasor. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Groves v. Taylor
green
2 sentences2007In this light, the Groves court cited Judge Kirsch as saying that "traumatic events can have severe, debilitating and foreseeable emotional effect even if not accompanied by physical injury, a direct impact, or a direct involvement." Id. (emphasis added). 2007In this light, the Groves court cited Judge Kirsch as saying that "traumatic events can have severe, debilitating and foreseeable emotional effect even if not accompanied by physical injury, a direct impact, or a direct involvement." Id. (emphasis added). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Delta Airlines v. Cook
green
1 sentence2005In Delta Airlines v. Cook, 816 N.E.2d 448 (Ind.Ct.App.2004), aff'd upon reh'g, 821 N.E.2d 400 (Ind.Ct.App.2005), the court further backed away from a strict enforcement of the impact rule. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Cohen v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.
green
2 sentences2004Seq, eg., Rowell v. Holt, 850 So.2d 474 (Fla.2003) (reaffirming vitality of impact rule); Cohen v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 389 Mass. 327 , 450 N.E.2d 581 (1983) (applying a "direct observer" rule); Butler v. The Burlington Northern, 119 S.W.3d 620 (Mo. App. W.D.2003) (applying zone of danger test); Andersen v. Baccus, 335 N.C. 526 , 439 S.E.2d 136 (1994) (applying foreseeability test). 2004Seq, eg., Rowell v. Holt, 850 So.2d 474 (Fla.2003) (reaffirming vitality of impact rule); Cohen v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 389 Mass. 327 , 450 N.E.2d 581 (1983) (applying a "direct observer" rule); Butler v. The Burlington Northern, 119 S.W.3d 620 (Mo. App. W.D.2003) (applying zone of danger test); Andersen v. Baccus, 335 N.C. 526 , 439 S.E.2d 136 (1994) (applying foreseeability test). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Butler v. the Burlington Northern
green
1 sentence2004Seq, eg., Rowell v. Holt, 850 So.2d 474 (Fla.2003) (reaffirming vitality of impact rule); Cohen v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 389 Mass. 327 , 450 N.E.2d 581 (1983) (applying a "direct observer" rule); Butler v. The Burlington Northern, 119 S.W.3d 620 (Mo. App. W.D.2003) (applying zone of danger test); Andersen v. Baccus, 335 N.C. 526 , 439 S.E.2d 136 (1994) (applying foreseeability test). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Rowell v. Holt
green
1 sentence2004Seq, eg., Rowell v. Holt, 850 So.2d 474 (Fla.2003) (reaffirming vitality of impact rule); Cohen v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 389 Mass. 327 , 450 N.E.2d 581 (1983) (applying a "direct observer" rule); Butler v. The Burlington Northern, 119 S.W.3d 620 (Mo. App. W.D.2003) (applying zone of danger test); Andersen v. Baccus, 335 N.C. 526 , 439 S.E.2d 136 (1994) (applying foreseeability test). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Andersen v. Baccus
green
2 sentences2004Seq, eg., Rowell v. Holt, 850 So.2d 474 (Fla.2003) (reaffirming vitality of impact rule); Cohen v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 389 Mass. 327 , 450 N.E.2d 581 (1983) (applying a "direct observer" rule); Butler v. The Burlington Northern, 119 S.W.3d 620 (Mo. App. W.D.2003) (applying zone of danger test); Andersen v. Baccus, 335 N.C. 526 , 439 S.E.2d 136 (1994) (applying foreseeability test). 2004Seq, eg., Rowell v. Holt, 850 So.2d 474 (Fla.2003) (reaffirming vitality of impact rule); Cohen v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 389 Mass. 327 , 450 N.E.2d 581 (1983) (applying a "direct observer" rule); Butler v. The Burlington Northern, 119 S.W.3d 620 (Mo. App. W.D.2003) (applying zone of danger test); Andersen v. Baccus, 335 N.C. 526 , 439 S.E.2d 136 (1994) (applying foreseeability test). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Ross v. Cheema
green
1 sentence2002Id. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
| Roe v. North Adams Community School Corp. green | 1 | 1997–1997 |
| Naccash v. Burger green | 1 | 1997–1997 |
| Adams v. Clean Air Systems, Inc. green | 1 | 1997–1997 |
| Rambo v. Cohen green | 1 | 1996–1996 |
| Kroger Co. v. Beck green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Shuamber v. Henderson neutral | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Naughgle v. Feeney-Hornak Shadeland Mortuary, Inc. green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Baker v. American States Insurance green | 1 | 1990–1990 |
| Indiana Motorcycle Ass'n v. Hudson green | 1 | 1990–1990 |
| Moffett v. Gene B. Glick Co., Inc. green | 1 | 1990–1990 |
| Endsley v. Game-Show Placements, Ltd. green | 1 | 1990–1990 |
| Kotteakos v. United States green | 1 | 1988–1988 |
| Sypniewski v. State green | 1 | 1986–1986 |
| Neal, Admr. v. Home Builders, Inc. green | 1 | 1984–1984 |
| Elza v. Liberty Loan Corp. green | 1 | 1982–1982 |
| Falzone v. Busch green | 1 | 1981–1981 |
| Enos Coal Mining Co. v. SCHUCHART green | 1 | 1978–1978 |
| Galbreath v. Engineering Construction Corp. green | 1 | 1978–1978 |
| Rotert v. Peabody Coal Company green | 1 | 1978–1978 |
| Chapman v. California red | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.