Marsden Threatened Rob Jr. with Being Thrown to Hell Research Paper

Marsden Threatened Rob junior with Being Thrown to Hell - Research Paper ExampleThe tort of intentional infliction of steamy distress has three elements outrageous conduct by the tortfeasor conduct that causes severe mental dread in the victim and the mental anguish suffered by the victim because of such behavior. On the other hand, heady infliction of aroused distress shares all the other elements as the intentional type except that in that respect was no intent to cause the distress (Buckley 130). The element of outrageous conduct refers to behavior that is so flakey or highly offensive as to result in the emotional distress of the victim. An example would be the case of Clifford v Hollander 6 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2201 (NY Civ CT 1980) where the defendant published a picture in a pornographic magazine and deliberately incorrectly identified it as the plaintiff, who was a freelance journalist. As a result, the plaintiff received obscene telephone calls from obviously disturbe d individuals. In another case, Martin v municipal Publications, 510 F. Supp. 255, 259 (ED Pa 1981), the defendant published a picture which he labeled as closet transvestites who got disgustful drunk. In both cases, the court ruled that the doings of the defendants can be classified as outrageous. It is also great that in intentional infliction of emotional distress, the plaintiff should be able to prove that the conduct of the defendant was intentional and that he so behaved deliberately so as to cause mental anguish on the victim. In some cases, this element came into conflict with the First Amendment freedom of speech as what happened in the illustrious case of Hustler Magazine v Falwell 485 US 46 (1988), where a Protestant Minister brought an action against Hustler Magazine, which, as a parody, featured him as having an incestuous rendezvous with his mother in an outhouse. The woo turned down the plaintiffsargument on the ground that he was a frequent figure and therefore as such may not sue for intentional infliction of emotional distress unless he can prove its falsity or that it was done in reckless disrespect for the truth.