Archibald v. Braverman

Archibald v. Braverman
Court	California Court of Appeals
Full case name	Joan Archibald, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Edward Braverman et al., Defendants and Respondents.
Decided	July 28, 1969
Citation	275 Cal. App. 2d 253
Case history
Subsequent action	Overruled in Thing v. La Chusa
Court membership
Judges sitting	Frank Henry Kerrigan, Stephen K. Tamura, Robert Gardner[a]
Case opinions
Decision by	Kerrigan
Concurrence	Tamura, Gardner

Archibald v. Braverman, 275 Cal. App. 2d 253 (1969), was a case decided by the California Court of Appeals that first ruled that visual perception of an accident was not a necessary prerequisite to recovery for negligent infliction of emotional distress under the criteria enunciated in Dillon v. Legg. The holding in Archibald was later overruled by the 1989 case Thing v. La Chusa.^[1][2][3]

• Krouse v. Graham, a case in 1977 with a similar ruling

• Text of Archibald v. Braverman, 275 Cal. App. 2d 253 (1969) is available from: CourtListener Google Scholar Justia