Regan v. Lee - 879 S.W.2d 133 (Tex. App. 1994)

Rule:

As to a finding that a party suffered severe emotional distress, the law intervenes only when the distress inflicted is so severe that no reasonable person could be expected to endure it. To recover damages, a person must prove more than mere worry, anxiety, vexation, embarrassment or anger.

Facts:

Appellee Mary Lee sued Appellant Timothy Daniel Regan for damages for the intentional infliction of emotional distress involving an incident on the road, where appellant used foul language against appellee. The trial court found for appellee and awarded her damages. Seeking review, appellant claimed the trial court erred in finding that appellant verbally assaulted appellee without provocation because the evidence was legally and/or factually insufficient to support the finding.

Issue:

Did the evidence sufficiently establish that appellee experience severe emotional distress, thereby entitling her for damages? 

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

Although appellee testified that she was "very angry," humiliated, and suffered from depression as a result of the incident because she could not explain to her children why appellant spoke to her in the manner that he did, the court found that appellee offered no evidence of the severity of her depression or humiliation, nor did she demonstrate how the distress was unendurable. Her primary purpose in bringing the suit was not to be compensated for her emotional distress, but to punish appellant. The court held the evidence was legally insufficient to support a finding of severe emotional distress, reversed the judgment, and rendered judgment for appellant.