What are the factors used to determine whether a lawyer is liable for the emotional harm caused to a plaintiff in a medical malpractice case?

As to the remaining factors, we quote the Third District's opinion in Merenda v. Superior Court, supra, 3 Cal.App.4th 1, 11, 4 Cal.Rptr.2d 87, a legal malpractice case, because its analysis applies with equal force here: "The moral blame attached to defendants' conduct is only that which attends ordinary negligence. There is no suggestion of bad faith or reckless indifference to the plaintiff's interest in emotional tranquility. The policy of preventing future harm is served by the sanction of compensation for the economic loss occasioned by the malpractice. The burden to the defendant of avoiding malpractice is of no moment since that burden has already been imposed. The principal consequences to the community of imposing an incremental liability for these damages are the additional costs of doing business as a lawyer and the benefits of socialization of the risk of emotional injury."