What is the test for emotional distress damages for an attorney who provided advice to a business client regarding the termination of a managerial employee?

This case is not one in which the defendant's conduct either caused physical impact and injury or involved intentional wrongdoing or bad faith--the traditional boundaries for recovery of emotional distress damages. (Quezada v. Hart, supra, 67 Cal.App.3d at pp. 761-763, 136 Cal.Rptr. 815.) Instead, the representation by the attorney in this case was typical of that afforded in an ordinary business transaction. Advice was given the owner of an automobile dealership concerning the procedures to be utilized in terminating a managerial employee. Acknowledging that the circumstances were somewhat unusual (the owner was a widow in ill health and the person to be terminated was a family member), the case nevertheless presents itself as one of typical legal advice to a business client. The conduct was allegedly negligent, and the loss alleged was pecuniary.