Supreme Court of Texas
855 S.W.2d 619 (Tex. 1993)
William Twyman (defendant) and Sheila Twyman (plaintiff) were married. Sheila filed a petition for divorce and added a claim for emotional distress based on William’s attempts to engage in deviate sexual acts. Sheila did not specify in her claim whether she was alleging intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress. Texas courts had not recognized the tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress or intentional infliction of emotional distress. The trial court granted Sheila’s petition for divorce and awarded her damages for negligent infliction of emotional distress. The court of appeals affirmed. William appealed, arguing that the doctrine of interspousal tort immunity prohibited Sheila’s claim for emotional distress.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Cornyn, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Hecht, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Phillips, C.J.)
Dissent (Spector, J.)
What to do next…
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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
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. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 223,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.