Legal Opinion
Corso v. Merrill
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided August 20, 1979No. 78-271PublishedCited by 141 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLampron, C.J.
This interlocutory appeal requires us to examine the question whether parents who perceive through their senses the fact that their child has been seriously injured and immediately observe the child at the accident scene can recover for emotional distress. We have previously denied recovery to parental bystanders. Jelley v. LaFlame, 108 N.II. 471, 238 A.2d 728 (1968). Nevertheless, recent judicial opinions and legal commentaries have convinced us to review critically the reasons we have previously given for denying recovery. For the reasons stated below we abandon our present rule, sustain…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Dillon v. LeggCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Tobin v. GrossmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
- Justus v. AtchisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- Krouse v. GrahamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by141 opinions
- Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway v. BuellSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Boyles v. KerrTexas Supreme Court · 1993
- Payton v. Abbott LabsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
- Lejeune v. Rayne Branch Hosp.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1990
- Amodio v. CunninghamSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
136 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.