where plaintiff demonstrates that the defendant owed her a particular duty based on the unique relationship between the parties). 50. In order to prove negligent infliction of emotional distress a plaintiff must show that: 1) the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff; 2) the defendant breached that duty; 3) the plaintiff suffered severe emotional distress as a result of defendant’s negligence; and 4) the plaintiff’s emotional distress was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of defendant’s negligent conduct. See Veilleux v. NBC, 206 F.3d 92, 129-30 (1st Cir.2000); see also Curtis v. Porter, 784 A.2d 18, 25 (Me.2001). 51. In the context of the physician-patient relationship, the physician owes the patient a duty to avoid emotional harm. See Bolton v. Caine, 584 A.2d 615, 618 (Me.1990) (<HOLDING>). 52. Here, Defendant had a duty that arose
holding that the unique nature of psychotherapistpatient relationship gives rise to a duty of care to the patient holding that relationship between executor and estates beneficiaries is one that gives rise to fiduciary duty as matter of law holding that a physicianpatient relationship gives rise to a duty to avoid emotional harm from failure to provide critical information to patient holding that a hospitals relationship to the family of deceased gives rise to a duty to avoid emotional harm from handling of remains recognizing that the nature of the therapistpatient relationship gives rise to a duty  to refrain from  causing emotional or mental harm to the patient