## Facts

- A seven-year-old boy became trapped between an elevator’s outer door and the elevator shaft wall in an apartment building and was dragged upward when the elevator moved.
- Police and emergency personnel worked for approximately four and one-half hours to free the child.
- The child’s mother remained at the scene, heard and saw her son’s suffering, and witnessed his death while he remained trapped.
- The mother alleged severe psychological injury requiring extensive treatment.
- She sued the building owners and elevator companies, including a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress based on witnessing her child’s injury and death.

## Issues

1. Whether a parent may recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress when the parent is not in the zone of danger and suffers no physical impact, but contemporaneously perceives a negligently inflicted serious injury or death to the parent’s child.
2. What limiting elements should govern bystander negligent infliction of emotional distress claims to define duty and constrain liability.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of New Jersey reversed the partial summary judgment dismissing the bystander emotional-distress claim and remanded.
- The court held that a bystander may recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress without personal exposure to physical danger when specified elements are satisfied.
- The court adopted a four-element test to limit recovery to foreseeable, serious emotional injury in narrowly defined circumstances.

## Legal Principles

- Duty in negligent infliction of emotional distress may be based on reasonably foreseeable risk of serious psychological harm, not solely on physical impact or zone-of-danger exposure.
- A bystander negligent infliction of emotional distress claim requires proof of:
  - Death or serious physical injury to another caused by defendant’s negligence.
  - A marital or intimate familial relationship between plaintiff and the injured person.
  - Sensory and contemporaneous observation of the injury-producing event at the scene.
  - Severe emotional distress resulting from the observation.
- The elements function as limiting conditions to avoid indeterminate liability while allowing recovery for grave, foreseeable emotional injury.

## Conclusion

The court recognized a bystander negligent infliction of emotional distress cause of action independent of the zone-of-danger rule and established a four-part test that ties liability to close relationship, on-scene contemporaneous perception, serious injury or death, and severe resulting emotional distress.


Portee v. Jaffee, 84 N.J. 88, 417 A.2d 521 (N.J. 1980)