Legal Definitions - impact rule

The impact rule was an older legal principle that required a person to have experienced some form of physical contact or injury to recover damages for emotional distress caused by someone else's negligence. In simpler terms, if you suffered severe emotional distress because of another person's carelessness, you generally couldn't sue for those emotional damages unless you were also physically touched or harmed in some way during the incident.

This rule was based on the idea that physical contact provided a more reliable indicator of genuine emotional suffering and helped prevent fraudulent claims. However, most legal systems in the United States have since moved away from this strict requirement, recognizing that severe emotional distress can occur even without direct physical contact.

Here are some examples illustrating how the impact rule would have applied:

• Example 1: Near-Miss Car Accident

  Imagine a pedestrian is walking on the sidewalk when a distracted driver swerves, narrowly missing them by inches. The pedestrian jumps out of the way, avoiding any physical contact, but is left severely shaken, experiencing panic attacks, and developing a lasting fear of crossing streets. Under the traditional impact rule, the pedestrian would likely be unable to sue the driver for negligent infliction of emotional distress because there was no actual physical contact or injury, despite the profound emotional trauma caused by the driver's negligence.

• Example 2: Defective Product Scare

  Consider a person who purchases a new household appliance that, due to a manufacturing defect, suddenly sparks and catches fire while they are using it. The person manages to extinguish the fire without being physically burned or touched by the flames, but they are deeply traumatized by the event, suffering from severe anxiety and insomnia. If the impact rule were strictly applied, this individual might be barred from recovering damages for their emotional distress because the defective product did not physically "impact" or injure them, even though it caused significant psychological harm.

• Example 3: Witnessing a Traumatic Event

  Suppose a homeowner is standing in their yard when a neighboring construction crew, due to their negligence, causes a large section of a wall on the adjacent property to collapse with a thunderous crash. The homeowner is a safe distance away and is not physically endangered or touched by any debris, but they witness the entire traumatic event, leading to severe post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression. Under the impact rule, the homeowner would likely not be able to recover for their emotional distress because they did not experience any direct physical contact or injury themselves, despite the emotional impact of witnessing the negligent act.