Search form

Courts Disagree On Reach of Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress Claims

  • April 15, 2000

The legal issue of emotional distress caused by the actions of an employer during the course of the employment relationship comes up frequently. In 1997, in Parsons v. United Technologies Corp., the Connecticut Supreme Court recognized a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress for actions associated with "the termination process." However, a growing number of courts are expanding the reach of such claims beyond the "termination process."

For example, in Karanda v. Pratt & Whitney Aircraft, the Connecticut Superior Court ruled that negligent infliction of emotional distress claims should be allowed at any time during employment. The court reasoned that, because the legislature changed the worker's compensation law in 1993 to exclude emotional distress injuries, plaintiffs may pursue claims for such injuries in a lawsuit.

In Mackay v. Rayonier (The Connecticut Employer, Winter 2000), a federal court followed Karanda and held that allegations of pre-termination misconduct could serve as a basis for a negligent infliction of emotional distress claim. By contrast, in Hanson v. Cytec Indus., a federal court recently disagreed with Karanda and ruled that negligent infliction of emotional distress claims are limited to claims arising out of the termination process. Similarly, a different Connecticut Superior Court judge disagreed with Karanda and dismissed the negligent infliction of emotional distress claim in Dorlette v. Harborside Healthcare.

Negligent infliction of emotional distress claims are popular with plaintiffs because typically they increase the potential for money damages well beyond discrimination or contract claims. We can expect to see more of these claims tacked onto requests for make-whole relief and compensatory damages in employment disputes. Ultimately, the Connecticut Supreme Court will need to resolve the controversy over the reach of these claims.

©2000 Jackson Lewis P.C. This material is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor does it create a client-lawyer relationship between Jackson Lewis and any recipient. Recipients should consult with counsel before taking any actions based on the information contained within this material. This material may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Reproduction of this material in whole or in part is prohibited without the express prior written consent of Jackson Lewis P.C., a law firm that built its reputation on providing workplace law representation to management. Founded in 1958, the firm has grown to more than 900 attorneys in major cities nationwide serving clients across a wide range of practices and industries including government relations, healthcare and sports law. More information about Jackson Lewis can be found at www.jacksonlewis.com.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

July 10, 2019

2019: The Mid-Year Outlook for Employers

July 10, 2019

The first six months of 2019 have proven to be busy, challenging professionals in the labor and employment communities to keep up with a number of newly enacted laws and regulations. In the 2019: Mid-Year Outlook for Employers, Jackson Lewis attorneys provide a snapshot of activity from the first half of the year as well as a preview of... Read More

July 10, 2019

New York Governor Signs Bills Aimed at Combating Salary Inequality

July 10, 2019

New York’s equal pay law prohibiting wage differentials based on protected class status was signed by Governor Andrew Cuomo on July 10, 2019. The new equal pay law will be effective on October 8, 2019. The Governor also signed into law a bar on employers inquiring about job applicants’ past salary history. The salary history law... Read More

July 10, 2019

New Oregon Law Restricts Nondisclosure, Nondisparagement Provisions in Workplace Agreements

July 10, 2019

A new Oregon law limits employers’ use of nondisclosure or nondisparagement agreements with their employees with respect to employment discrimination or sexual assault. The Workplace Protection Act (WPA), signed by Governor Kate Brown, also requires employers to adopt written anti-discrimination policies regarding internal employment... Read More

Related Practices