Is there any case law in which a plaintiff was denied negligent infliction because they did not see the injury happening?

[34 Cal.App.4th 1046] The case is closest to Golstein v. Superior Court (1990) 223 Cal.App.3d 1415, 273 Cal.Rptr. 270, in which negligent infliction recovery was denied to parents whose son had received an overdose of radiation, causing a grotesque alteration in his appearance and his eventual death. While the parents did not see the radiation being administered, they did witness its results, and they argued this should be sufficient. But understanding perception of the injury-causing event is essential, and if it cannot be perceived, recovery cannot be allowed. Thing's policy statement requires that plaintiffs "experience a contemporaneous sensory awareness of the causal connection between the negligent conduct and the resulting injury." (Id. at p. 1427, 273 Cal.Rptr. 270.)