Robb v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that although a claim for NIED does not require a physical impact, it nevertheless requires the plaintiff to demonstrate that the emotional distress “produced physical consequences”
• limiting the tort to include only that which satisfy traditional negligence’s requirements of foreseeability and proximate cause
• allowing a claim for NIED where the negligent operation of a train caused the destruction of the plaintiff’s car, causing severe fright and emotional distress, because she was in the zone of danger
• \the early difficulty in tracing a resulting injury back through fright or nervous shock has been minimized by the advance of medical science\
• “the early difficulty in tracing a resulting injury back through fright or nervous shock has been minimized by the advance of medical science”
• “It is the duty of the courts to afford a remedy and redress for every substantial wrong”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).