Ewing v. Northridge Hospital Medical Center
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BOLAND, J.
SUMMARY
As a general rule, a mental health practitioner has no duty to warn third persons about, nor any duty to predict, a patient’s dangerous propensities. This rule is subject to an important exception: when a patient has “communicated to the psychotherapist a serious threat of physical violence against a reasonably identifiable victim,” the psychotherapist must take reasonable steps to warn the victim and a law enforcement agency of the threat. (Civ. Code, § 43.92, subds. (a), (b) (section 43.92).)
In this action, the parents of a victim killed by a mental patient sued for…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Tarasoff v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Ybarra v. SpangardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Cobbs v. GrantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Nally v. Grace Community ChurchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- Richards v. StanleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Pipitone v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
- Munstermann v. Alegent Health-Immanuel Medical CenterNebraska Supreme Court · 2006
- MURRAY'S IRON WORKS, INC. v. BoyceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Pinero v. SPECIALTY RESTAURANTS CORP.California Court of Appeal · 2005
- Sanchez v. BrookeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.