Maryland
How Brower v. Ackerley applies in Maryland: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Torts.
Maryland law recognizes the importance of protecting individuals against intentional infliction of emotional distress and supports claims similar to those in Brower v. Ackerley. The state underscores the need for a showing of extreme and outrageous conduct to establish such claims.
In Maryland, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant's conduct was so outrageous and extreme that it goes beyond all possible bounds of decency, and that such conduct caused severe emotional distress.
The court held that the plaintiff must prove that the defendant's conduct was intentional or reckless, and that it caused extreme emotional distress.
The court emphasized the necessity of establishing that the defendant's actions were extreme and outrageous to succeed in a claim of emotional distress.
In this case, the court ruled that for claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress to be actionable, the conduct must surpass the common standards of decency.
Maryland's standard for intentional infliction of emotional distress aligns with the federal standard, which similarly requires conduct to be extreme and outrageous. However, Maryland places greater emphasis on the context of the behavior when evaluating what constitutes extreme conduct.
Understanding the principles from Brower v. Ackerley is crucial for the Maryland bar exam, especially regarding claims related to emotional distress.