Torts -- Negligent infliction of emotional distress -- Impact rule -- Action brought against retailer following abduction of plaintiff from retailer's parking lot -- In granting summary judgment in favor of defendants on basis of impact rule, trial court erred in focusing on whether physical injury occurred as opposed to considering whether issues of material fact existed concerning whether plaintiff had been touched during her abduction -- For plaintiff to have endured a contact sufficient to render an action sustainable, the plaintiff need meet only slight requirements -- Summary judgment was improper where plaintiff's affidavit raised issues of fact as to applicability of impact rule -- Civil procedure -- Plaintiff's affidavit in opposition to motion for summary judgment did not, as defendants contended, directly contradict deposition testimony in which she stated that she could not remember whether she had been “physically touched” by assailants -- Plaintiff provided credible explanation for discrepancy in her affidavit when she explained that she had misunderstood the word “touched” to mean assault or sexual touching, not merely physical contact   Reported at 33 Fla. L. Weekly D1893a