Mother Not Entitled To Emotional Damages from Playground Mishap

author by Joseph C. Maya on Apr. 28, 2017

Accident & Injury Accident & Injury  Personal Injury Lawsuit & Dispute  Lawsuit 

Summary: Blog about a mother who was not able to collect damages for emotional distress after her child was injured on a playground.

Contact the personal injury attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. today. We can help you get the just compensation you deserve for your injuries or those of a loved one. For a free initial consultation, call 203-221-3100 or email JMaya@Mayalaw.com.

In Reilly v. Joni’s Childcare & Preschool, mother sued a preschool for losses she and her son suffered after her son’s fall to the ground from playground equipment when he was in the preschool’s care. The mother argues that the injuries were a result of the preschool’s negligence. Respectively, she brought claims of negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) and negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED). In law, negligence is the failure to use reasonable care, resulting in damage or injury to another. In order to succeed in this claim, the mother must prove that (1) the preschool owed a duty of care to the mother and child, (2) the preschool breached that duty and, (3) the breach of duty was a direct cause of the mother and child’s (4) real and compensable injury. A claim for IIED holds an individual, who through extreme and outrageous conduct, intentionally or recklessly caused severe emotional distress to another, subject to liability for such emotional distress and for any bodily harm that results from it.” To prevail in a claim for IIED, the mother must establish that the preschool purposely acted inflict mental suffering on the mother and child. Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress is similar to IIED, but less difficult to establish. For NIED, the mother need only establish that the preschool’s negligence, rather than intentional behavior, as the cause of her mental and emotional harm.

At 8 a.m on March 12, 2007, the mother dropped her son of at the preschool. Later that morning, minor plaintiff and twenty other children were playing outside on a playground under the supervision of a single staff person from the preschool. The supervisor was never within forty feet of the child. The boy fell six feet from a wooden jungle gym and suffered serious injury. The preschool moved to dismiss the claims made by the mother. The court struck the mother’s claims for emotional distress. In order for the preschool to be responsible for the mother’s emotional distress, it must have been foreseeable. In other words, the court could not hold the preschool liable for an injury that they were not aware of. The mother’s mere witness of the child’s injury did not entitle her to compensation for whatever emotional impact it may or may not have had.

At Maya Murphy, P.C., our personal injury attorneys are dedicated to achieving the best results for individuals and their family members and loved ones whose daily lives have been disrupted by injury, whether caused by a motor vehicle or pedestrian accident, a slip and fall, medical malpractice, a defective product, or otherwise. Our attorneys are not afraid to aggressively pursue and litigate cases and have extensive experience litigating personal injury matters in both state and federal courts, and always with regard to the unique circumstances of our client and the injury he or she has sustained. 

Please contact Joseph C. Maya, Esq., at 203-221-3100, or at JMaya@mayalaw.com, to schedule a free consultation.

Source: Reilly v. Joni’s Childcare & Preschool, 2010 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1206, 2010 WL 2573496 (Conn. Super. Ct. May 13, 2010)

Legal Articles Additional Disclaimer

Lawyer.com is not a law firm and does not offer legal advice. Content posted on Lawyer.com is the sole responsibility of the person from whom such content originated and is not reviewed or commented on by Lawyer.com. The application of law to any set of facts is a highly specialized skill, practiced by lawyers and often dependent on jurisdiction. Content on the site of a legal nature may or may not be accurate for a particular state or jurisdiction and may largely depend on specific circumstances surrounding individual cases, which may or may not be consistent with your circumstances or may no longer be up-to-date to the extent that laws have changed since posting. Legal articles therefore are for review as general research and for use in helping to gauge a lawyer's expertise on a matter. If you are seeking specific legal advice, Lawyer.com recommends that you contact a lawyer to review your specific issues. See Lawyer.com's full Terms of Use for more information.

© 2024 LAWYER.COM INC.

Use of this website constitutes acceptance of Lawyer.com’s Terms of Use, Email, Phone, & Text Message and Privacy Policies.