Ramirez v. Armstrong - 1983-NMSC-104, 100 N.M. 538, 673 P.2d 822

Rule:

The following standards apply to actions for negligent infliction of emotional distress to bystanders. 1) There must be a marital, or intimate familial relationship between the victim and the plaintiff, limited to husband and wife, parent and child, grandparent and grandchild, brother and sister and to those persons who occupy a legitimate position in loco parentis; 2) The shock to the plaintiff must be severe, and result from a direct emotional impact upon the plaintiff caused by the contemporaneous sensory perception of the accident, as contrasted with learning of the accident by means other than contemporaneous sensory perception, or by learning of the accident after its occurrence; 3) There must be some physical manifestation of, or physical injury to the plaintiff resulting from the emotional injury; 4) The accident must result in physical injury or death to the victim.

Facts:

The deceased was attempting to cross the street when he was struck and killed by the driver. Three children saw the driver's vehicle strike the deceased. As a result of the emotional distress and shock caused by their observation, all three children contended that they suffered both physical and mental injury. The parents filed an action for negligent infliction of emotional distress. The district court granted defendant driver's motion for judgment on the pleadings and dismissed plaintiff parents' negligent infliction of emotional distress complaint. The parents appealed.

Issue:

Did a cause of action exist in New Mexico for negligent infliction of emotional distress to bystanders? 

Answer:

Yes, under certain conditions.

Conclusion:

The court held that the driver could have been liable in a tort action for negligent infliction of emotional distress to the children, who were bystanders. The court adopted the following standards for negligent infliction of emotional distress to bystanders: 1) there must have been a marital or intimate familial relationship between the victim and the plaintiff; 2) the shock to the plaintiff must have been severe, and result from a direct emotional impact upon the plaintiff caused by the contemporaneous sensory perception of the accident; 3) there must have been some physical manifestation of or physical injury to the plaintiff resulting from the emotional injury; and 4) the accident must have resulted in physical injury or death to the victim. The judgment of the trial court was reversed as to the children who witnessed the accident, but affirmed as to the child who only heard of the accident and to the child who was not related to the deceased.