AK · jury_instructions
Alaska Civil Pattern Jury Instruction 3.15A
Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress: Preexisting Duty
[Plaintiff] claims that [s/he] suffered severe emotional distress as a result of [defendant]’s negligence when [describe event/incident]. In order to find in favor of [plaintiff] on this claim, you must find that it is more likely true than not true that:
1. [Defendant] negligently breached his/her duty to [plaintiff] to [describe duty]; and
2. [Defendant]’s negligence caused [plaintiff] to experience severe emotional distress.
You must find both of these elements present to compensate [plaintiff] for negligent infliction of emotional distress.
Severe emotional distress is distress that is so substantial or enduring that no reasonable person should be expected to endure it. Severe emotional distress exists when a reasonable person would be unable to adequately cope with the mental stress caused by the circumstances. Examples include neuroses, psychoses, chronic depression, phobia, post-traumatic stress disorder, and shock. But temporary fright, disappointment, or regret do not qualify as severe emotional distress.
History
Alaska Civil Pattern Jury Instructions 3.15A, dated (2019); list of updates: November 2019. Prepared by the Alaska Civil Pattern Jury Instructions Committee; published by the Alaska Court System. The Alaska Court System states that these instructions "have not been approved or promulgated by any court or the Alaska Bar Association."
Provenance
- Source
- courts.alaska.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-24
- Edition
- 2026-09-24
- Content hash
d201645b7c462630a4feeb5aaa84bc691c72c12feb0671a0b49b7f5072756085
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.