Legal Opinion
Kazatsky v. King David Memorial Park, Inc.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided June 15, 1987No. 02857PublishedCited by 303 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*185 OPINION
NIX, Chief Justice.*
In this appeal we have agreed to decide whether a compulsory nonsuit was appropriately entered in a trespass action seeking recovery for intentional infliction of severe emotional distress by outrageous conduct as defined in section 46 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts. Previously this Court has acknowledged but has never had occasion to specifically adopt section 46 as the law in Pennsylvania.1 Again, because the evidence adduced in this matter does not establish a right of recovery under the terms of the provision as set forth in the Restatement, we again…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Dillon v. LeggCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Don Chuy, in No. 77-1412 v. The Philadelphia Eagles Football Club (Sued as "The Philadelphia Eagles"), in No. 77-1411 and the National Football LeagueCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979
- Sinn v. BurdSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- Niederman v. BrodskySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
- PAPIEVES Et Ux. v. KellySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by303 opinions
- Andrews v. City of PhiladelphiaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
- Hoy v. AngeloneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Ruth Ann Bougher v. University of Pittsburgh, Wesley W. Posvar and Trevor Melia, in Their Official and Individual Capacities, Mary-Ann Bishop CoffeyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989
- Field v. Philadelphia Electric Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Miller v. MillerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1998
298 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.