KENNETH SMITH, Claimant, v. THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Respondent.
Case summary
Claimant, an inmate, alleged verbal assaults and intentional infliction of emotional distress from being called an insulting name. The court dismissed the claim, finding the name-calling did not rise to the level of a compensable tort.
Cases cited: Rosenbaum v. Parkerland Packing Co., Inc. (1977), 55 Ill. App. 3d 959, 963; McGrath v. Fahey (1998), 126 Ill. 2d 78
AI-generated summary from the opinion text — may contain errors. The opinion text and PDF above are the official record.
Headnotes
- 456 52 Ill. Ct. Cl.
- TORTS-what necessary to state claim for assault-name calling generally not actionable. In order to state a claim for assault, the Claimant must allege an unreasonable apprehension of receiving a battery, and in order for name calling to be actionable, it must be truly extreme and outrageous, and it is clear that the tort does not extend to mere insults, indignities, threats, petty impressions, or other trivialities.
- PRISONERS AND INMATES-inmate subjected to name calling-claim dismissed. A claim brought by an inmate alleging that he was subjected to verbal assaults and intentional infliction of emotional distress as a result of name calling by other inmates and prison employees was dismissed, because the conduct did not rise to the level of an actionable claim.
ORDER
RAUCCI, CJ.
This cause coming on to be heard on the Respondent’s motion to dismiss, and the Claimant’s response thereto, the Court being fully advised in the premises, the Court finds that Claimant, an inmate of the Lincoln Correctional Center, has filed a four-count complaint alleging that Claimant was subjected to “verbal assaults” and intentional infliction of emotional distress. He claims that four employees of the Respondent’s Department of Corrections called him, or allowed him to be called by others, “Shitty Smitty from New York City” on a regular basis.
The complaint does not state a claim for either assault or intentional infliction of emotional distress. In order to state a claim for assault, Claimant must allege an “unreasonable apprehension of receiving a battery.” (Rosenbaum v. Parkerland Packing Co., Inc. (1977), 55 Ill. App. 3d 959, 963.) Name calling must be “truly extreme and outrageous” and it is “clear that the tort does not extend to mere insults, indignities, threats, petty impressions, or other trivialities.” (McGrath v. Fahey (1998), 126 Ill. 2d 78; Restatement (Second) of Torts (1965), section 46, comment d at 73.) While the name calling may be insulting, it hardly rises to the level of a basis for a compensable claim.
[*457] It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the Respondent’s motion to dismiss is granted and this claim is dismissed and forever barred.