Thomas v. Harford Mut. Ins. Co
In Thomas v. Harford Mut. Ins. Co., 2004 WL 1102362, at 3 (Del. Super. 2004) Judge Ridgely, opined.
"While defendants argue that there must be evidence of a physical injury apart from the injury covered under the workers' compensation claim, this is not the law in Delaware. In Cummings v. Pinder, the Delaware Supreme Court held that a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress may be made even in the absence of accompanying bodily harm, if the conduct is outrageous."