Question

While living in her home country of Tanzania, Sophia Kiwanuka signed an employment contract with Anne Margareth Bakilana, a Tanzanian living in Washington, D.C. Kiwanuka traveled to the United States to work as a babysitter and maid in Bakilana's house. When Kiwanuka arrived, Bakilana confiscated her passport, held her in isolation, and forced her to work long hours under threat of having her deported. Kiwanuka worked seven days a week without breaks and was subjected to regular verbal and psychological abuse by Bakilana. Kiwanuka filed a complaint against Bakilana for intentional infliction of emotional distress, among other claims. Bakilana argued that Kiwanuka's complaint should be dismissed because the allegations were insufficient to show outrageous intentional conduct that resulted in severe emotional distress. If you were the judge, in whose favor would you rule? Why?

Intentional infliction of emotional distress can be defined as __________ and __________ conduct resulting in severe emotional distress to another.

Answer 1

extreme

outrageous

Step-by-step explanation:

Intentional infliction of the emotional distress is the law tort which allows the individuals in order to recover for the severe emotional distress which is caused by the another individual who is recklessly or intentionally inflicted distress.

It is the extreme and outrageous conduct which results in severe distress.

If one is the judge, then she/he should use different measures to validate the Kiwanuka's complaints and make a strong decision on the guilty person.