McHenry v. United States

USCA1 Opinion [NOT FOR PUBLICATION] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT ____________________ No. 97-2050 P. F. MCHENRY, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant, Appellee. ____________________ APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. Frank H. Freedman, Senior U.S. District Judge] ____________________ Before Selya, Circuit Judge, Cyr, Senior Circuit Judge, and Boudin, Circuit Judge. ____________________ P. F. McHenry on brief pro se. Donald K. Stern, United States Attorney, and Karen L. Goodwin, Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee. ____________________ MARCH 12, 1998 ____________________ Per Curiam. Appellant P.F. McHenry appeals from the district court's dismissal of her complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1). We affirm. For the reasons given by the district court in its order dated July 18, 1997, appellant's statutory property claim was properly dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Nor did appellant adequately assert a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress since she failed to allege that appellee's conduct caused severe emotional distress, a necessary element of that cause of action under Massachusetts law. See Tetrault v. Mahoney, Hawkes & Goldings, 425 Mass. 456, 466, 681 N.E.2d 1189, 1197 (1997). Consequently, dismissal of her complaint was proper. See Doyle v. Hasbro, Inc., 103 F.3d 186, 195 (1st Cir. 1996) (affirming dismissal of claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress under Massachusetts law in part because plaintiff never even attempted to plead severe distress); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Affirmed. See Loc. R. 27.1.