Legal Opinion

Ewing v. Northridge Hospital Medical Center

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 27, 2004No. B166525PublishedCited by 13 opinions

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

  1. Tarasoff v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Ybarra v. SpangardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Cobbs v. GrantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Nally v. Grace Community ChurchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  5. Richards v. StanleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Pipitone v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
  2. Munstermann v. Alegent Health-Immanuel Medical CenterNebraska Supreme Court · 2006
  3. MURRAY'S IRON WORKS, INC. v. BoyceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  4. Pinero v. SPECIALTY RESTAURANTS CORP.California Court of Appeal · 2005
  5. Sanchez v. BrookeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API