Legal Opinion
Hegel v. McMahon
Washington Supreme Court
Decided August 20, 1998No. Nos. 65218-0; 65105-1PublishedCited by 64 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDurham, C. J.
Plaintiffs in these consolidated cases seek to recover for emotional trauma they experienced after witnessing the suffering of an injured family member at the scene of an accident. Their claims below were dismissed because the Plaintiffs were not present when the accidents occurred. We reverse and hold that Plaintiffs may recover for emotional distress caused by observing an injured relative at the scene of an accident shortly after its occurrence and before there is substantial change in the relative’s condition or location.
FACTS
Hegel v. McMahon
Dale Hegel ran out of gas and pulled over to…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Consolidated Rail Corporation v. GottshallSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Washington State Physicians Insurance Exchange & Ass'n v. Fisons Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 1993
- Paugh v. HanksOhio Supreme Court · 1983
- Johnson v. Ruark Obstetrics & Gynecology Associates, P.A.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
- Lejeune v. Rayne Branch Hosp.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1990
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by64 opinions
- Berger v. SonnelandWashington Supreme Court · 2001
- Berger v. SonnelandWashington Supreme Court · 2001
- Kloepfel v. BokorWashington Supreme Court · 2003
- Kumar v. Gate Gourmet, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2014
- Kloepfel v. BokorWashington Supreme Court · 2003
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.