New Hampshire
How Cohen v. City of New York applies in New Hampshire: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Torts.
In New Hampshire, the principles from Cohen v. City of New York regarding emotional distress claims are recognized, especially in cases where the conduct is extreme or outrageous. The state also values the delineation between intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent infliction of emotional distress.
To succeed in a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress in New Hampshire, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant acted intentionally or recklessly, that the conduct was extreme and outrageous, and that it caused severe emotional distress.
The court held that the plaintiff must support claims of emotional distress with evidence of outrageous conduct.
The court found that emotional distress claims need not be linked to physical injury, underscoring the validity of Cohen's principle in allowing emotional claims.
This case reaffirmed the standards set for establishing cases of emotional distress in New Hampshire, paralleling Cohen's framework.
Federal courts follow similar standards for emotional distress claims, as seen in Cohen v. City of New York. However, New Hampshire law tends to be more stringent by requiring clear evidence of outrageous conduct rather than a mere negligence standard, reflecting a more cautious approach.
Cohen v. City of New York's principles are often referenced in the New Hampshire bar exam, particularly in questions focused on torts involving emotional distress.