The California Supreme Court has held that, in a negligent infliction of emotional distress case, the plaintiff need not be aware of the defendant’s role in causing the family member’s physical injury at the time the injury occurs:

In Downey v. City of Riverside, the California Supreme Court held:

For purposes of clearing the awareness threshold for emotional distress recovery, it is awareness of an event that is injuring the victim — not awareness of the defendant’s role in causing the injury — that matters.

The Supreme Court held that plaintiff, who “was giving driving directions to her daughter over cell phone when her daughter was severely injured in a car crash . . . [,] heard the collision and its immediate aftermath” and allegedly suffered emotional distress as a result, could recover from “individuals and entities responsible for the condition of the roadway where the crash occurred” even though she did not know at the time of the accident that these parties were partially at fault.

While contemporaneous knowledge of the injury causing emotional distress is required by a family member bystander to recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress, it is no longer necessary that the family member know of the defendant’s role in causing the injury at the time it occurs.

Should an unfortunate accident, of which you were contemporaneously aware, happen to one of your family members that caused you emotional distress, but, do not know what person or entity caused the accident, seek legal counsel. You now may be able to recover for your injury once the person or entity is identified.

The information presented is not intended to be, and does not constitute, “legal advice.” Because each situation varies, and only brief summary information is provided here, you should not use this information as a basis for action unless you have independently verified with your own counsel that it applies to your particular situation.