The fact pattern given involves multiple parties and presents multiple issues/claims. The first major issue presented involves the teacher in the classroom and the principal. While teaching her classroom of ten children, the principal enters the room and tells the teacher that her husband was involved in an accident and was at the hospital in critical condition. The teacher leaves her classroom to go to the hospital. When she arrives at the hospital, however, she finds that her husband was not there, and after calling his cell phone, the teacher finds that her husband is safe and sound at home. It turns out that the principal had lied to the teacher because he was mad that she had rejected his advances for a date. In these facts, the teacher may have a claim against the principal for any emotional distress she may have suffered as a result of the principal lying. In torts, there are two types of claims that can be asserted for emotional distress: (1) intentional infliction of emotional distress; and (2) negligent infliction of emotional distress. A claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress is similar to intentional infliction of emotional distress, but only requires showing of negligence rather than intent. A cause of action for negligent infliction of emotional distress consists of (1) a duty of care owed by the defendant to the plaintiff, (2) breach of that duty by the defendant resulting in severe emotional suffering and (3) actual and proximate causation of severe emotional distress. The key aspect for a claim in negligent infliction of emotional distress is that physical injury or illness is necessary for recovery under this claim. If there is a physical injury, then the damages for the attendant’s emotional distress are recoverable as part of the physical injury. If there is a physical impact to the plaintiff, which does not cause actual physical