Twyman v. Twyman, 855 S.W.2d 619 (Sup.Ct.Texas 1993)

CASE: Woman wins $15,000 plus interest for negligent infliction of emotional distress in divorce settlement (for husband's repeated attempts to coerce her into engaging in bondage); husband appeals.

FACTS: In her divorce settlement, Sheila Twyman won $15,000 for negligent infliction of emotional distress. Her husband William tried to emotionally coerce his wife into engaging in sadomasochistic bondage activities with her, even after she told him she was uncomfortable with such activities because she had been raped a knifepoint before their marriage. The court of appeals affirmed the judgment; William appealled to the Supreme Court of Texas.

COURT SAYS: Remand case for new trial

HOLDING: Trial court erred in ruling that a wife can collect for negligent infliction of emotional distress in a divorce proceeding, as the tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress is not recognized in the state of Texas. However, the Court expressly adopts the tort of intentional infliction of emptional distress and that the tort can be asserted in a divorce proceeding. When the tort action is brought in a divorce proceeding, a spouse cannot recover both tort damages and a disproportionate division of the community estate based on the same conduct.

RATIONALE:

• Restatement formulation of intentional infliction of emotional distress allows freedom of individual action while providing reasonable opportunity for redress for victims of conduct thatis determined to be utterly intolerable.
• This case was decided on a wrong legal theory—negligent infliction of emotional distress. Since this theory is not recognized in the state of Texas, the lower court's ruling must not stand.
• This court has broad discretion to remand for a new trial in the interest of justice and when it appears that the facts when developed at trial may support recovery on an alternative theory.

T O P