Opinion ID: 394912
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Infliction of Emotional Distress

Text: 25 An essential element of an intentional infliction of emotional distress cause of action is outrageous conduct. Stoiber v. Honeychuck, 101 Cal.App.3d 903, 921, 162 Cal.Rptr. 194, 202 (1980). 26 The beneficiaries recite several incidents they claim constitute the requisite extreme conduct. The record fails to reveal any single act or course of conduct rising to an outrageous, extreme, or abusive level. 27 We forego comment on the patently innocuous incidents. The beneficiaries otherwise cite LICNA's 7-month delay in denying their claim, the conduct of a LICNA investigator, an alleged threat to Mr. Capps' employment, and the filing of the declaratory judgment action. 28 The undisputed facts show that LICNA's investigation was reasonably prompt and diligent. Although its investigator may have lacked tact, his actions certainly were not outrageous. 29 We discern no threat to Capps' employment in the letter of which he complains. The applicable portion reads: 30 We are aware that you are an attorney associated with the law firm of Adams, Duque and Hazeltine which specializes in representing insurance companies including (LICNA). As such, we believe that you can recognize that (LICNA) is merely trying to complete an investigation .... 31 The filing of a lawsuit, unless patently groundless, is not outrageous behavior. 32 The district court properly entered summary judgment for LICNA.