a. Facts-
P underwent 3 surgeries. First surgeon left some sutures in P. Second surgeon,
D, removed the sutures. P sued the first surgeon and asked for D’s testimony to
help him. D refused, noting “people like P are thieves”. As P went in for a
third unrelated surgery, P saw D, although not his surgeon. D then said “I
don’t like you, I don’t like you”. P sued D for outrage
b. Procedural
History- Trial Ct held for D, Kansa Sup Ct agreed.
c. Issue-
Whether P can bring an outrage action against D for insults (D is NOT P’s doctor)
d. Holding-
No, P cannot bring an outrage action against D for mere insult, indignities,
threats, annoyances, petty expressions, or other trivialities.
e. Rule-
Mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty expressions, or other
trivialities cannot be the basis of outrage claims.
f. Rationale-
People are expected to become “hardened” to a certain amount of criticism,
rough language, and their feelings being hurt.
i.
People should have the freedom to
express “unflattering opinion” and “blow off relatively harmless steam”
g.
Notes- “Power relationship”…much
like the outrageous boss, had the P’s
actual surgeon said it, it would have been a different
i.
You don’t need to prove your “distress”
medically…sucks for D
ii.
No damages were found in this
case…damages MUST be present to claim outrage
No comments:
Post a Comment