Are statements made in court privileged and how do they affect liability for intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED)?

Statements made in court are generally considered privileged because they are part of the judicial process, which promotes the interest of justice and allows participants to speak freely without fear of subsequent liability. This principle establishes that witnesses, parties, and attorneys enjoy a level of protection for statements made during legal proceedings, enabling them to provide full and honest testimony or representations without the threat of being sued for defamation or other claims arising from those statements.

In the context of intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED), the privilege of court statements further strengthens the defense against such claims. Since IIED requires outrageous and extreme conduct that causes severe emotional distress, statements made in court do not typically rise to this level due to their procedural context and the expectations of participants in legal settings. Therefore, a party cannot hold another liable for IIED based solely on statements made during the course of court proceedings, aligning with the notion that the judicial process should be insulated from such tort liability to maintain its integrity.

Understanding this privilege is essential when analyzing potential claims related to emotional distress, as it highlights the important boundary between acceptable conduct in legal contexts and other interactions that might lead to liability.