As recently as 2018, the Supreme Court of Rhode Island has held that in order to successfully state a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, some medically supported physical symptoms are required. In other words, mere emotional harm is not enough to state a claim. Many other states, however, allow a plaintiff to recover for this tort so long as they are able to prove that the emotional distress is very severe; thus, in those states, accompanying physical symptoms are not required,
During your freshman year at a Rhode Island college, while attempting to join a fraternity, you were subject to hazing that violated both state law and university policy. You were made to stay awake for long periods of time, do the laundry for the senior members, and serve them at dinner. You were utterly humiliated, made even worse by the fact that you were not admitted to the fraternity. This humiliation caused you severe emotional distress.

 As a result, your grades are suffering. you experience social anxiety, and you frequently burst into tears. You want to sue the college and the fraternity for intentional infliction of emotional distress, but you have no physical symptoms per se, other than some weight gain. You.note that many other states allow recovery in a case such as yours as long as the emotional distress is severe.
Explain the concepts of precedent and stare decisis in our common law system. In light of these concepts, do you think you could successfully sue for intentional infliction of emotional distress in R..? If yes, why? If no, can you think of any arguments that might persuade a court to revisit earlier rulings?
Response prompt (if appropriate): After posting, respond to two classmates. In each response, agree or disagree with the position offered by your classmates and explain your position. Provide sources where appropriate