Wisconsin
How Brown v. State of Alabama applies in Wisconsin: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Torts.
Wisconsin law recognizes the potential for emotional distress claims stemming from the principles in Brown v. State of Alabama, particularly when there is a governmental action that infringes on constitutional rights. The state applies a balancing test to assess whether the distress suffered is severe and if the defendant's conduct was extreme and outrageous.
In Wisconsin, for a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, the plaintiff must show that the defendant's conduct was exceptionally outrageous and that the emotional distress suffered was severe and unreasonable.
The court held that sustained actions by a state agency that unjustly harm an individual can support claims for emotional distress.
The court ruled that in cases of intentional infliction of emotional distress, particularly by state actors, the severity of the emotional damage must be thoroughly evidenced.
The court emphasized a stringent standard for what constitutes 'outrageous' behavior, aligning with the standards articulated in Brown.
Wisconsin's approach is aligned with the federal standard set forth in cases like Brown, which emphasizes the need for extreme conduct for emotional distress claims. However, Wisconsin may apply more stringent requirements for proving the severity of emotional distress compared to some federal jurisdictions.
Claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress often appear on the Wisconsin bar exam, particularly concerning the specific standards that must be met under state law.