In our opinion, in addition to cases where it has previously been allowed, recovery for the negligent infliction of mental anguish should be allowed in cases where, as a result of a defendant’s negligence, a plaintiff has ingested an indefinite amount of a harmful substance. In such cases the finder of fact may conclude that the plaintiff has sustained sufficient physical injury to support an award for mental anguish even if subsequent medical diagnosis fails to reveal any other physical injury. The period of mental anguish, of course, would be confined to the time between discovery of the ingestion and the negative medical diagnosis or other information that puts to rest the fear of injury. Id.; cf. Carroll v. Sisters of Saint Francis Health Servs., Inc., 868 S.W.2d 585 (Tenn.1993) (<HOLDING>). In other words, the de minimus “physical
holding that absent any proof that the plaintiff was in fact exposed to hiv he could not recover damages for his fear of contracting aids holding that a tort claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress is distinct from a claim for emotional distress damages under the employment discrimination statute holding that a party claiming negligent infliction of emotional distress cannot recover for emotional disturbance alone holding that to recover damages for negligent infliction of emotional distress based on fear of contracting aids plaintiff must allege actual exposure to hiv recognizing torts of intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress