What is the test for damages for witness emotional distress?

In Dillon v. Legg, supra, a mother sought damages for emotional trauma she suffered from seeing her infant daughter run over by a negligently driven[176 Cal.App.3d 852] automobile. Earlier cases had held that an onlooker may not recover unless he was himself in the path of the danger and feared for his own safety. Bystander emotional distress cases present a duty-of-care issue turning on the degree of foreseeability of the risk, the court said, which should be evaluated in each case according to "such factors as the following: (1) Whether plaintiff was located near the scene of the accident as contrasted with one who was a distance away from it. (2) Whether the shock resulted from a direct emotional impact upon plaintiff from the sensory and contemporaneous observance of the accident, as contrasted with learning of the accident from others after its occurrence. (3) Whether plaintiff and the victim were closely related, as contrasted with an absence of any relationship or the presence of only a distant relationship." (Dillon v. Legg, supra, 68 Cal.2d at pp. 740-741, 69 Cal.Rptr. 72, 441 P.2d 912.) ³ The court held that the mother, who alleged that she witnessed her child's accident at close range, had stated a good cause of action.