The Oklahoma Bar Journal September 2025

conduct by the defendant (the con duct must be so egregious that it is considered atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized society); 2) intent or recklessness on the part of the tortfeasor (the defen dant must have acted intentionally or recklessly); and 3) the suffering of severe emotional distress (the plaintiff must demonstrate severe mental distress that no reason able person could be expected to endure). 5 These criteria are out lined in the Oklahoma Uniform Jury Instructions, which define emotional distress as encompass ing “mental distress, mental pain and suffering, or mental anguish,” including reactions such as “fright, horror, grief, humiliation, embar rassment, anger, chagrin, disap pointment, and worry.” 6 Early Oklahoma jurisprudence on emotional distress focused intently on whether the alleged mental injury was accompanied by physical injury to the plaintiff. The question, therefore, became whether bodily injury was nec essary to establish an emotional distress claim, whether negligent or intentional. Notably, Oklahoma

Statements or opinions expressed in the Oklahoma Bar Journal are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Oklahoma Bar Association, its officers, Board of Governors, Board of Editors or staff.

SEPTEMBER 2025 | 25

THE OKLAHOMA BAR JOURNAL