Ridings v. Maze

414 P.3d 835 (Okla. 2018) · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · March 6, 2018 · No. 115782; consolidated with 115869

Summary

The Oklahoma Supreme Court held that plaintiffs who witnessed an auto-pedestrian accident from their home were bystanders rather than direct victims and therefore could not recover for negligent or intentional infliction of emotional distress. The Court dismissed the emotional-distress claims against the driver's parents, while affirming the denial of dismissal of the negligence-related claims against Norman Public Schools as premature. The matter was affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Writing for the Court
Winchester, J.; Combs, C.J.; Gurich, V.C.J.; Kauger, J.; Edmondson, J.; Reif, J.; Wyrick, J.; Colbert, J.
Jurisdiction
Oklahoma
Decision date
March 6, 2018
Docket number
115782; consolidated with 115869
Procedural posture
Plaintiffs brought negligence and emotional-distress claims after a child was struck by a car after exiting a school bus. The defendants sought dismissal under Oklahoma's pleading standard. The district court denied the driver's parents' motion to dismiss and denied dismissal of the remaining negligence claims against Norman Public Schools, while dismissing the intentional-infliction claim against the school. The district court certified the interlocutory orders for appeal, and the Oklahoma Supreme Court granted certiorari and consolidated the matters.
Standard of review
De novo review of orders granting or denying a motion to dismiss; the court considers the controlling law, accepts the petition's allegations and reasonable inferences as true, and asks whether the plaintiff can prove any set of facts under a cognizable legal theory.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Alexandria Maze, Lance Maze, Cheryl Maze, Norman Public Schools v. Jason Ridings, Kathryn Ridings, H.R., T.R., P.R.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

negligent infliction of emotional distressintentional infliction of emotional distressmotions to dismissnegligenceappellate procedure

Practice areas

tortscivil procedureappellate procedurenegligence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Oklahoma recognizes negligent-infliction-of-emotional-distress recovery for plaintiffs who were not physically involved in an accident but allegedly witnessed injury to a close family member.
  2. Whether the petition stated a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress against the driver's parents.
  3. Whether the negligence, respondeat superior, and negligent training and supervision claims against Norman Public Schools were subject to dismissal at the pleading stage.

Holdings

  1. Under Oklahoma law, a plaintiff seeking emotional-distress damages must be a direct victim physically involved in the accident, not a bystander whose distress arises solely from witnessing injury to another. The Ridings plaintiffs were bystanders because they were not physically involved in or placed in harm's way by the accident; their negligent emotional-distress claims therefore had to be dismissed.
  2. The intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress claim against Lance and Cheryl Maze was properly dismissed because the petition did not allege conduct sufficient to establish intentional or reckless extreme and outrageous conduct.
  3. Dismissal of the negligence, respondeat superior, and negligent training and supervision claims against Norman Public Schools was premature because the petition alleged facts that could support actionable negligence under some set of provable facts.

Key quotations

A motion to dismiss is granted when "there are no facts consistent with the allegations under any cognizable legal theory." (¶ 4)
The controlling law in Oklahoma requires Plaintiffs to establish they were a direct victim in order to recover for emotional distress. (¶ 12)
The bystander Plaintiffs were not directly involved in the accident which injured H.R. and their claims for negligent and intentional emotional distress against Driver's Parents must be dismissed. (¶ 17)

Factual background

H.R. Ridings was struck by a car driven by Alexandria Maze after H.R. crossed the street upon exiting a Norman Public Schools bus. H.R.'s parents and siblings alleged that they witnessed the accident from the window of their home and sought damages for negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress. They also alleged negligence, respondeat superior, and negligent training and supervision against Norman Public Schools.

Procedural history

The case reached the Oklahoma Supreme Court through two certified interlocutory appeals from the District Court of Cleveland County. The Supreme Court retained both matters and reviewed whether the emotional-distress claims could proceed and whether the negligence claims against Norman Public Schools were prematurely dismissed. It affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

Remand instructions

Remand for further proceedings consistent with the opinion. The emotional-distress claims against the driver's parents are to be dismissed, while the remaining negligence claims against Norman Public Schools may proceed beyond the pleading stage.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…