Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Montana opinions name it 1 courts 2000–2015 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Montana 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 |
|---|---|---|
Renville v. Fredricksongreen2 sentences2015Grant of summary judgment on Vainio’s claim for emotional distress. ¶18 A plaintiff claiming emotional distress must show that he suffered emotional distress “so severe [that] no reasonable person could be expected to endure it.” White, ¶ 41 (quoting Feller v. First Interstate Bancsystem, Inc., 2013 MT 90, ¶ 34 , 369 Mont. 444 , 299 P.3d 338 ) (alteration in original). “[S]ummary judgment is appropriate for disposing of an emotional distress claim that lacks sufficient evidentiary support.” White, ¶ 43 (citing Renville v. Fredrickson, 2004 MT 324, ¶¶ 4-7, 16 , 324 Mont. 86 , 101 P.3d 773 ). 2015Grant of summary judgment on Vainio’s claim for emotional distress. ¶18 A plaintiff claiming emotional distress must show that he suffered emotional distress “so severe [that] no reasonable person could be expected to endure it.” White, ¶ 41 (quoting Feller v. First Interstate Bancsystem, Inc., 2013 MT 90, ¶ 34 , 369 Mont. 444 , 299 P.3d 338 ) (alteration in original). “[S]ummary judgment is appropriate for disposing of an emotional distress claim that lacks sufficient evidentiary support.” White, ¶ 43 (citing Renville v. Fredrickson, 2004 MT 324, ¶¶ 4-7, 16 , 324 Mont. 86 , 101 P.3d 773 ). | 2 | 2 |
Sacco v. High Country Independent Press, Inc.green2 sentences2013Sacco, 271 Mont. at 239 , 896 P.2d at 429 (emphasis added). ¶43 We have agreed that summary judgment is appropriate for disposing of an emotional distress claim that lacks sufficient evidentiary support. 2013Sacco, 271 Mont. at 239 , 896 P.2d at 429 (emphasis added). ¶43 We have agreed that summary judgment is appropriate for disposing of an emotional distress claim that lacks sufficient evidentiary support. | 1 | 1 |
First Bank (N.A.) — Billings v. Clarkgreen2 sentences2000First Bank, 236 Mont at 207 , 771 P.2d at 91-92 (stating that severe emotional distress is only a new interpretation of the existing “significant impact” requirement). ¶61 Therefore, notwithstanding Lee’s legally flawed argument that either physical injury or a substantial invasion of a legally protected interest is necessary to recover damages for emotional distress, we are obliged to address the substance of Lee’s claim that the Special Master’s findings and conclusions do not, as a matter of law, support an award for damages under the element of “serious or severe,” in light of the circumst 2000First Bank, 236 Mont at 207 , 771 P.2d at 91-92 (stating that severe emotional distress is only a new interpretation of the existing “significant impact” requirement). ¶61 Therefore, notwithstanding Lee’s legally flawed argument that either physical injury or a substantial invasion of a legally protected interest is necessary to recover damages for emotional distress, we are obliged to address the substance of Lee’s claim that the Special Master’s findings and conclusions do not, as a matter of law, support an award for damages under the element of “serious or severe,” in light of the circumst | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Montana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Feller v. First Interstate Bancsystem, Inc.
green
2 sentences2015Grant of summary judgment on Vainio’s claim for emotional distress. ¶18 A plaintiff claiming emotional distress must show that he suffered emotional distress “so severe [that] no reasonable person could be expected to endure it.” White, ¶ 41 (quoting Feller v. First Interstate Bancsystem, Inc., 2013 MT 90, ¶ 34 , 369 Mont. 444 , 299 P.3d 338 ) (alteration in original). “[S]ummary judgment is appropriate for disposing of an emotional distress claim that lacks sufficient evidentiary support.” White, ¶ 43 (citing Renville v. Fredrickson, 2004 MT 324, ¶¶ 4-7, 16 , 324 Mont. 86 , 101 P.3d 773 ). 2015Grant of summary judgment on Vainio’s claim for emotional distress. ¶18 A plaintiff claiming emotional distress must show that he suffered emotional distress “so severe [that] no reasonable person could be expected to endure it.” White, ¶ 41 (quoting Feller v. First Interstate Bancsystem, Inc., 2013 MT 90, ¶ 34 , 369 Mont. 444 , 299 P.3d 338 ) (alteration in original). “[S]ummary judgment is appropriate for disposing of an emotional distress claim that lacks sufficient evidentiary support.” White, ¶ 43 (citing Renville v. Fredrickson, 2004 MT 324, ¶¶ 4-7, 16 , 324 Mont. 86 , 101 P.3d 773 ). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Voorhees v. Preferred Mutual Insurance
green
1 sentence2008When an emotional distress claim is not supported factually, the insurer can and should move to dismiss the meritless claims.” Voorhees, 607 A.2d at 1262 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Swanson v. Champion International Corp.
green
2 sentences2003Corp. (1982), 197 Mont. 509 , 646 P.2d 1166 ; therefore, the court is not bound by the settlement agreement which allocated liability to the emotional distress claim. 2003Corp. (1982), 197 Mont. 509 , 646 P.2d 1166 ; therefore, the court is not bound by the settlement agreement which allocated liability to the emotional distress claim. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Pikop v. Burlington Northern Railroad
green
1 sentence2002Rather, it requested guidance by submitting to the Minnesota Court of Appeals the following certified question, “[d]oes the RLA and/or FELA preempt state court jurisdiction over plaintiff’s claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress?” The Minnesota Court of Appeals answered this question “no.” Pikop, 390 N.W.2d 743 . ¶35 Burlington Northern appealed this resolution of Gulati’s claim by the Minnesota Court of Appeals to the Minnesota Supreme Court. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
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.