Kloepfel v. Bokor

149 Wn. 2d 192 (2003)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Kloepfel v. Bokor

Washington Supreme Court
149 Wn. 2d 192 (2003)

  • Written by Haley Gintis, JD

Facts

In 1994, Joseph Bokor (defendant) and Judy Kloepfel (plaintiff) began living together. In 1997, Kloepfel moved out of the home and obtained a restraining order against Bokor. The restraining order provided that Bokor was forbidden from calling Kloepfel, threatening Kloepfel, or visiting Kloepfel’s home or work. Bokor frequently violated the order. Between August 1997 and October 2000, Bokor called Kloepfel around 740 times. Bokor also called the men that he believed were romantically involved with Kloepfel. During this time, Bokor threatened to kill Kloepfel and at least one man she had dated. Kloepfel began avoiding her home to evade Bokor. Kloepfel’s boss was forced to make arrangements to keep Kloepfel protected while at work. In January 1998 and March 1999, Bokor was convicted of a harassment, domestic-violence misdemeanor. In September 1999, Bokor was convicted of felony stalking. Following Bokor’s convictions, Kloepfel filed a cause of action against Bokor. Kloepfel claimed that Bokor had committed various torts against her, including the intentional infliction of emotional distress. The trial court found that Bokor had committed the intentional infliction of emotional distress and awarded Kloepfel $60,256. Bokor appealed on the ground that the evidence Kloepfel introduced was insufficient. Bokor argued that Kloepfel should have been required to produce objective symptomology evidence that she suffered severe emotional distress. The court of appeals rejected Bokor’s argument and affirmed the trial court. The matter was appealed to the Washington Supreme Court.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Sanders, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 741,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 741,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 741,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership