## Facts

- In 1987, Monte C. and Linda Hansen bought a 25-foot cruiser manufactured by Sea Ray Boats, Inc.
- On April 1, 1988, their son, Monte T. Hansen, and others were injured by in-water electrical shock attributed to an allegedly faulty grounding system in the boat.
- Linda Hansen was on the boat and witnessed her son begin to drown due to the electrical current.
- The family sued in federal court, asserting: (a) Linda Hansen’s negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED) claim; (b) Monte T. Hansen’s negligence claim for physical injuries; and (c) the parents’ warranty claims, including under the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act.
- The district court bifurcated the warranty claims from the negligence-based claims; the Hansens prevailed on the warranty claims and later received an attorney-fee award.

## Issues

1. Whether Utah law permitted Linda Hansen’s NIED claim when she witnessed her son’s peril but was not herself in actual physical danger.
2. Whether the district court abused its discretion by denying Monte T. Hansen’s motion for a new trial after a defense verdict on his negligence claim.
3. Whether the district court properly awarded attorney fees to the Hansens as prevailing consumers under the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act.

## Decision

- The court affirmed summary judgment for Sea Ray on Linda Hansen’s NIED claim.
- The court affirmed the denial of Monte T. Hansen’s motion for a new trial and left intact the jury verdict for Sea Ray on negligence.
- The court affirmed the attorney-fee award to the Hansens under the Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act.

## Legal Principles

- Under Utah’s zone-of-danger approach to NIED, a plaintiff must be within the zone of physical danger created by the defendant’s negligence and experience a reasonable fear for the plaintiff’s own safety; distress solely from witnessing another’s injury is insufficient.
- Denial of a motion for a new trial is reviewed for abuse of discretion; an appellate court will not disturb a jury verdict absent prejudicial error or an evidentiary basis so lacking that the verdict cannot stand.
- Under 15 U.S.C. § 2310(d)(2), a prevailing consumer in a Magnuson–Moss warranty action may recover reasonably incurred costs and attorney fees, subject to the trial court’s reasonableness determination.

## Conclusion

The Tenth Circuit held that Utah law barred Linda Hansen’s NIED claim because she was not placed in actual physical peril, found no reversible error warranting a new trial on the negligence verdict for Sea Ray, and upheld the district court’s discretionary attorney-fee award to the Hansens as prevailing parties on their Magnuson–Moss warranty claims.


Hansen v. Sea Ray Boats, Inc., 107 F.3d 21 (10th Cir. 1997)