| Venue: | SCOTUS |
| Facts: | Buckley was exposed to asbestos at work. He is worried he will develop cancer, although he hasn't yet. |
| Posture: | Dismissed at trail; reversed on appeal. |
| Issue: | Does Buckley's contact with asbestos dust amount to the "physical impact" required for recovery? |
| Holding: | No. At least not unless he becomes symptomatic. Affirmed. |
| Rule: | Where there's no harm other than disease-related risk, there wasn't the kind of "physical impact" required. |
| Reasoning: | Recovery for negligently infliced emotional distress is only possible in certain circumscribed circumstances. This is so that courts aren't taxed with deciding the mental impact of every set of facts on a case-by-case basis. There's really no sound way to determine how much impact an increased risk of dying has on a person. |
| Dicta: | He needs to show evidence of harm: there was none of this in the record. The claim fails as a matter of law. |