Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. McCarson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that insurance company’s actions were not so outrageous in character or extreme in degree as to go beyond the bounds of decency
• holding that the insured failed to allege a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress where the insurer asserted its \legal rights in a legally permissible way\ by withholding benefits until the insured provided certain information in accordance with the policy
• holding that an actor is not liable “where he has done no more than to insist upon his legal rights in a permissible way, even though he is well aware that such insistence is certain to cause emotional distress” (quotation omitted)
• recognizing tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress under Florida law
• adopting standard set forth in the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46, comment d (1965), for evaluating claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress
• adopting standard set forth in the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46, comment d (1965), for evaluating claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).