Burgess v. Superior Court 2 Cal.4th 1064, 9 Cal.Rptr.2d 615, 831 P.2d 1197 (1992) Burgess delivered a baby and the obstetrician negligently caused the child to suffer brain damage. She sued for damage to the baby, but also for her own emotional distress. The doctor argued that their duty was to the baby, not to the mother, so their liability was limited to the damage to the baby. The Court found for Burgess. The Court held that there are two classes of emotional distress claims: Where the plaintiff is a bystander who has no preexisting relationship with the defendant. See Thing v. LaChusa (771 P.2d 814 (1989)). Where the plaintiff is in a relationship (here doctor-patient) and the claim is based on a breach of duty assumed by the defendant that arises out of the relationship. The Court found that for special relationship claims like the one in this case, liability is based on the relationship between the parties. Both parties understood that a physician owes a duty to a pregnant woman not to negligently damage her baby. Basically, this case said that if you are in a preexisting relationship with someone (like you are their doctor), and are deemed responsible for their happiness, you can be held liable for emotional distress because you have a duty to care about their happiness.