Missouri Supreme Court Reverses Decision on Emotional Distress Case

The Missouri Supreme Court recently reversed a case involving emotional distress of one party after a major collision.

The case involves the grant of summary judgment to the defendant in a negligence case where the plaintiff sought damages, in part, for emotional distress caused from seeing the victims in the defendant’s vehicle, including a child who died in the accident. In a June 1, 2008 a decision written by Judge Patricia Breckenridge, the Supreme Court of Missouri reversed the trial court’s judgment and sent back the case for further proceedings.

One of the deciding factors was the fact that the plaintiff left his vehicle after the accident and went to the defendant’s vehicle does not make him a bystander and, therefore, the more restrictive standards for bystander recovery do not apply. Summary judgment for the defendant was improper because the plaintiff pleaded facts that, if proved true, establish the defendant’s negligence and the legal elements necessary to recover damages for emotional distress.

The case involves an accident during a June 2004 rainstorm. An automobile driven by Michael Jones spun across the median of Interstate 44 in Laclede County, Mo., and collided with a tractor-trailer driven by Tommy Jarrett. The collision caused Jarrett’s knees to hit the steering wheel and dashboard, twisting his ankle and knee. Nonetheless, he got out of his truck and ran to Jones’ automobile, where he saw Jones and his wife badly injured and saw the body of their two-year-old daughter, who was killed in the collision. He stayed there until the police arrived.

Jarrett claimed that, as a result of the accident, he suffered mental and emotional injuries, including post-traumatic stress disorder and feelings of anxiety, trauma, anguish and stress. Jarrett and his wife sued Jones for negligence. Jarrett sought damages for minor physical injuries, post-traumatic stress disorder, medical expenses, wage and income loss, and pain and suffering, mental anxiety, emotional trauma, and anguish and stress; his wife sought damages for loss of consortium. The trial court granted Jones’ motion for summary judgment, finding that Jarrett was not in the zone of danger when he viewed the daughter’s death as he did not fear personal injury to himself at that time and that Jones owed no duty to prevent Jarrett from viewing the daughter’s body as Jones was injured and unconscious at the time. The Jarretts appeal.

Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh Jr. dissented. He held that because the Jarett was a bystander when he went to help the accident victims and saw the dead child, the more stringent zone-of-danger test applies, and that under this test, the plaintiff could not recover because he was not in reasonable fear of physical injury to himself when he viewed the dead child.

The judgment of the trial court is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

Source: Lawyers USA Web site

Topics Missouri