Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
49. Which of the following conclusions would best support a claim by the woman against the debt collector for intentional infliction of emotional distress?
Although the debt collector knew that the woman was not legally responsible for the son's debt, he called the woman multiple times each day and threatened to destroy her credit. He also told her that he knew where she lived and that he was going to withdraw the money from her bank account. As a result, the woman suffered great mental anguish, was unable to sleep, and ultimately suffered serious health consequences.
A wealthy elderly woman was repeatedly harassed by a debt collector over a period of two months. The debt collector was trying to collect a large debt owed to his client by the woman's impoverished adult son.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
A is incorrect. Even if the woman's distress was reasonably foreseeable to the debt collector, that fact does not suffice to establish the recklessness or intentionality necessary for IIED liability.
B is incorrect. The woman's subjective belief that the debt collector might someday attack her does not establish that she suffered severe distress or that the debt collector's conduct was extreme and outrageous, as required in a claim for IIED.
C is incorrect. A mere failure to comply with industry custom does not establish any of the elements of IIED. Therefore, this is not a strong argument to support the woman's IIED claim.