[§663-8.9] Serious emotional distress
arising from property damage; cause of action abolished; exception for physical
injury. (a) No party shall be liable for the negligent infliction of
serious emotional distress or disturbance if the distress or disturbance arises
solely out of damage to property or material objects.
(b) This section shall not apply if the
serious emotional distress or disturbance results in physical injury to or
mental illness of the person who experiences the emotional distress or
disturbance. [L Sp 1986, c 2, §22]
Case Notes
Defendants' motion for summary judgment on all negligent
infliction of emotional distress claims granted, where plaintiffs-intervenors
had not even alleged physical injury or a diagnosed illness. 535 F. Supp. 2d
1149 (2008).
Because a corpse is neither "property" nor a
"material object" for purposes of this section, this section does not
apply to negligent infliction of emotional distress claims arising from the
negligent mishandling of a corpse. 96 H. 147, 28 P.3d 982 (2001).
Cited: 895 F. Supp. 1365 (1995).
Mentioned: 900 F. Supp. 1339 (1995); 907 F. Supp. 2d 1165
(2012).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
14
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1994–2024 · leading case:
Blair v. Ing, 21 P.3d 452 (Haw. 2001).
Blair v. Ing, 21 P.3d 452 (Haw. 2001).
· cites it 2× “See HRS § 663-8.9 (1993). 9 Consequently, the damages for a legal malpractice claim arising in the estate planning context based upon negligence will rarely, if ever, include damages other than consequential damages.”
City of Tyler v. Likes, 962 S.W.2d 489 (Tex. 1998).
“2d 509 (1970), but the state legislature in 1986 reversed that policy, enacting a statute barring liability for negligent infliction of emotional distress based solely on damage to property, Haw.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 663-8.9 (Michie 1995).”
Mr. & Mrs. Doe Parents No. 1 v. State, Dep't of Educ., 58 P.3d 545 (Haw. 2002).
“The foregoing principle, however, has been “modified somewhat” by HRS § 663-8.9 (1993), which requires a predicate physical injury to the NIED claimant before he or she may recover damages for negligent infliction of emotional distress, where he or she claims that the…”
Erlich v. Menezes, 981 P.2d 978 (Cal. 1999).
“(1999); Haw. Rev. Stat. § 663-8.9 (1998).) Permitting damages for emotional distress on the theory that certain contracts carry a lot of emotional freight provides no useful guidance.”
Ross v. Stouffer Hotel Co. (Hawai'i) Ltd., 879 P.2d 1037 (Haw. 1994).
“Generally, the case is one in which the recitation of the facts to an average member of the community would arouse his resentment against the actor, and lead him to exclaim, "Outrageous!" Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46 comment d.”
U.S. Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. NCL Am., Inc., 535 F. Supp. 2d 1149 (D. Haw. 2008).
· cites it 2× “(b) This section shall not apply if the serious emotional distress or disturbance results in physical injury to or mental illness of the person who experiences the emotional distress or disturbance.”
Caraang v. PNC Mortg., 795 F. Supp. 2d 1098 (D. Haw. 2011).
“2d] 1278 (1994), or a mental illness, see Haw.Rev.Stat. § 663-8.9. Dowkin v. Honolulu Police Dep’t, Civ.”
Wood v. Greenberry Fin. Servs., Inc., 907 F. Supp. 2d 1165 (D. Haw. 2012).
“2d] 1278 (1994), or a mental illness, see Haw.Rev.Stat. § 663-8.9. Dowkin v. Honolulu Police Dep’t, Civ.”
Swartz v. City Mortg., Inc., 911 F. Supp. 2d 916 (D. Haw. 2012).
“2d 1278 (1994), or a mental illness, see Haw. Rev.Stat. § 663-8.9. Dowkin v. Honolulu Police Dep’t, Civ.”
Ansagay v. Dow Agrosciences LLC, 153 F. Supp. 3d 1270 (D. Haw. 2015).
“2d 1278 (1994), or a mental illness, see Haw. Rev. Stat. § 663-8.9 . The IIED and NIED claims in Counts VIII and IX are not premised on any allegation that the packaging or labeling of Dursban TC provided an inadequate warning of its dangers or should have otherwise been changed.”
Monet v. State of Hawaii (D. Haw. 2022).
“Further, Haw. Rev. Stat. § 663-8.9 requires that, if “the psychological distress arises solely out of damage to property or to material objects,” the plaintiff himself must have a predicate physical injury.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.