Lachenman v. Stice

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• offering evidence that defendant enjoyed upsetting plaintiff coupled with allegations of defendant's conduct permitted an inference that defendant acted with intent to harm plaintiff emotionally
• discussing Cullison and stating that “a demonstrated intent to harm seems inconsistent with mere reckless conduct”
• summary judgment dismissing IIED claim appropriate when dog owners negligently permitted their dogs to fatally attack a neighbor’s dog
• “[T]here is also nothing in the record which would support a reasonable inference to the effect that the [defendants] intended to cause [the plaintiff] emotional distress by their behavior.”
• “The elements of the tort are that the defendant: (1) engages in extreme and outrageous conduct (2) which intentionally or recklessly (3) causes (4) severe emotional distress to another.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).