Utah
How Brower v. Ackerley applies in Utah: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Torts.
Utah generally adheres to the principles established in Brower v. Ackerley regarding intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED). The state requires a demonstration of extreme and outrageous conduct coupled with intent to cause, or reckless disregard for, emotional distress.
In Utah, a plaintiff must show that the defendant's conduct was extreme and outrageous, and that it intentionally or recklessly caused emotional distress.
The court ruled that public officials could not shield themselves from IIED claims through qualified immunity if their conduct was extreme and outrageous.
The court found sufficient evidence of IIED when a company’s actions intentionally sought to inflict emotional distress on a homeowner.
The court affirmed that sexual harassment could constitute extreme and outrageous conduct necessary for an IIED claim.
Utah's IIED standard closely mirrors the federal standard articulated in cases like Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., which also emphasizes the need for conduct to be extreme and outrageous. However, Utah’s application tends to focus more explicitly on the intentionality behind the conduct.
Understanding the principles established in Brower v. Ackerley is essential for the Utah bar exam, particularly in relation to torts involving emotional distress and intentional torts.