Opinion ID: 2584803
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The superior court erred when it dismissed Lorenz's claims for the intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Text: Lorenz's third, fourth, sixth, seventh, and eighth claims for relief involved the intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED). Maddox argued that Lorenz failed to allege extreme or outrageous conduct and that she made insufficient and improper allegations of damages. On appeal, Lorenz groups her claims together into a more general argument of IIED. Lorenz's pleadings can be read to state a cause of action for IIED. An action for IIED lies where: (1) the conduct is extreme and outrageous, (2) the conduct is intentional or reckless, (3) the conduct causes emotional distress, and (4) the distress is severe. [41] Lorenz claimed at least one instance of arguably outrageous conduct: Maddox allegedly stated that the next time he caught [Lorenz] alone he would shoot her. However, some of Lorenz's other allegations do not appear to amount to outrageous conduct for the purposes of IIED. For example, she alleged that Maddox verbally harassed and taunted her and her daughter. [42] Lorenz sufficiently alleged that Maddox's conduct was intentional and that it caused her emotional distress. Lorenz's allegations suggested that the distress was severe, resulting in anxiety, depression, and migraine headaches. On remand, Lorenz should replead all of her IIED claims. [43] Maddox will have the same options as outlined above concerning Lorenz's defamation claims. We make no comment on collateral estoppel or mootness that might result from our decision in this appeal.