Binschus v. Department of Corrections

¶23 (dissenting) — The issue presented is not whether counties should be subject to an expansive duty to *584prevent recidivism by former jail inmates. Rather, the issue presented is whether the evidence in the record is sufficient to create a factual question about whether Skagit County fulfilled its duty to protect third parties from foreseeable violence by pretrial detainees and jail inmates in accordance with Restatement (Second) of Torts § 319 (Am. Law Inst. 1965) (§ 319). The majority limits the scope of this duty to maintaining physical control over the detainee or inmate during periods of…