Judicial Linking of Intentional Emotional Distress to Intrusion

Abstract

The earliest cases involving intentional infliction of emotional distress and intrusion date to the 19th century, but this study reviews recent cases in the highest nonfederal courts in the 50 states and District of Columbia through early 1989. The study finds that 25 states recognize both torts, while some recognize one or the other or neither. Some states recognized intentional infliction of emotional distress first, others intrusion. The American Bar Association officially recognized the intentional infliction of emotional distress tort in 1948 and intrusion in 1965. This study points out how similar the language of complaint often is with regard to both torts, and offers some advice to reporters, especially with regard to avoiding intrusion during news gathering.

A Century of JMCQ Legal Issues in Media: Scholarly Commitment to Free Press, Free Speech, and More

“…E. Stevens, 1977). Plopper (1990) examined emotional distress in relation to intrusion-that is, how they are interrelated as a common law liability for reporters and where they are both recognized, or one or the other is recognized, as a cause of action.…”

“…In the 1970s and 1980s, the infliction of emotional distress emerged as a cause of action against mass media, and articles scrutinized the emotional distress cases and their implications for news media (Drechsel, 1985; G. E. Stevens, 1977). Plopper (1990) examined emotional distress in relation to intrusion—that is, how they are interrelated as a common law liability for reporters and where they are both recognized, or one or the other is recognized, as a cause of action.…”