Can a plaintiff claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress without showing any physical injury?

Similarly, the courts have allowed claims for emotional distress where the defendant's conduct is "extreme or outrageous" ⁴ or for "exceptional classes of cases where emotional suffering is a highly probable consequence of negligence or breach, primarily cases of corpse mishandling and negligently transmitted death notices." (Blackmer, Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals: Negligence Actions for Emotional Distress and Loss of Consortium without Physical Injury, supra, 69 Cal.L.Rev. 1142, 1153.)

The court in Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, supra, 27 Cal.3d 916, 167 Cal.Rptr. 831, 616 P.2d 813, held a separate cause of action may be stated for the negligent infliction of serious emotional distress without any showing of physical injury. "[T]he unqualified requirement of physical injury is no longer justifiable." (Id., at p. 928, 167 Cal.Rptr. 831, 616 P.2d 813.) "The essential question is one of proof; whether the plaintiff has suffered a serious and compensable injury ... is a matter of proof to be presented to the trier of fact. The screening of claims on this basis at the pleading stage is a usurpation of the jury's function." (Id., at pp. 929-930, emphasis added, 167 Cal.Rptr. 831, 616 P.2d 813.)