Legal Opinion

Thing v. La Chusa

California Supreme Court

Decided April 27, 1989No. L.A. 32301PublishedCited by 319 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

EAGLESON, J.

The narrow issue presented by the parties in this case is whether the Court of Appeal correctly held that a mother who did not *647witness an accident in which an automobile struck and injured her child may recover damages from the negligent driver for the emotional distress she suffered when she arrived at the accident scene. The more important question this issue poses for the court, however, is whether the “guidelines” enunciated by this court in Dillon v. Legg (1968) 68 Cal.2d 728 [69 Cal.Rptr. 72, 441 P.2d 912, 29 A.L.R.3d 1316] are adequate, or if they should be refined…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Jacobellis v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  2. Rowland v. ChristianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  3. Dillon v. LeggCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  4. Tarasoff v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  5. Molien v. Kaiser Foundation HospitalsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by319 opinions

  1. Consolidated Rail Corporation v. GottshallSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  2. Boyles v. KerrTexas Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Potter v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.California Supreme Court · 1993
  4. Bily v. Arthur Young & Co.California Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Christensen v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991

314 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API