Laserfiche WebLink
Ir. Vcvk. the court awardsd $10,000 for rnental anguish after <br />the plaintiff produced evidence of headaches, inscr>nia, depression <br />and her lack of confidence in her ability to be a manager. .he <br />court in Tasks awarded plaintiff $15,000 for mental anguish upon a <br />showing that she had been suo:ected to daily sexual harassment tor <br />over one and one half years. Awarding $10,000 for mental anguish, <br />the deP.ochemont court statec that objective evidence of phsyicai <br />manifestation emotional distress protects against <br />"possibility of trumped up claims" and considered that the <br />plaintiff offered her own suojective testimony and the objective <br />testimony of .her mother and form.er boyfriend that work-related <br />stress caused her to suffer 11 stomach ailments, 2) headaches, 3; <br />sleeplessness, 4) nervousness, and 5) frequent crying episodes. <br />Each of the plaintiffs here testified that he was upset by <br />taking the MFP.S tests and by the wording of specific questions. <br />However, the court heard no evidence from plaintiffs or their <br />farhlies about the extent or severity of the claimed emotional <br />distress. There was no testi.m.ony about any therapy or counselling <br />undertaken by plaintiffs. There was no evidence of medical <br />treatm.ent or expenses incurred by plaintiffs. Even Dr. Neal, <br />plaintiffs' psychological expert, had neither provided, nor even <br />recommended, any counselling or therapy. <br />Furthermore, there was no e%'idence that the plaintiffs were so <br />upset as to interfere with their e.mpioi-'m.ent or activities of daily <br />living. Thus, other than the uncorroborated subjective complaints <br />of plaintiffs, there 13 no ibjective verification a.n-' <br />17