19. In a claim by the woman against the young man, the woman's right to recovery will depend on whether

Traditionally, there are two requirements for a negligent infliction of emotional distress claim. First, the plaintiff must suffer physical injury from the emotional distress. Second, the plaintiff must be within the zone of danger. However, courts will waive the zone of danger requirement so long as three factors are present: (i) the plaintiff and the person injured are closely related; (ii) the plaintiff was present at the scene of the injury; and (iii) the plaintiff personally perceived the event. However, a plaintiff can also recover even if she is not directly related to the person whom the defendant's conduct is directed at.

D is correct. In this situation, the plaintiff can recover only if the plaintiff was present at the time of the event and the emotional distressed suffered by plaintiff led to bodily harm. The facts state that the woman had a physical injury due to the emotional distress, namely a heart attack. Therefore, as the woman was outside of the zone of danger, her right to recovery will depend on whether she can recover emotional distress damages caused solely by another's peril or injury.

A is incorrect. This question presents an issue of negligent infliction of emotional distress. That claim is not satisfied merely because a person breached a duty to another person, there are several other requirements. This answer choice oversimplifies the analysis.

B is incorrect. This answer choice oversimplifies the claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress. The relevant inquiry is not whether it is foreseeable that a third party might suffer physical harm based on harm caused to another person—that is almost always foreseeable. The key question on these facts is whether the woman can recover based on harm caused to an unrelated victim.

C is incorrect. This answer misrepresents the facts because the woman did, in fact, suffer bodily impact (the heart attack). It is thus incorrect.