Legal Opinion

Hamman v. County of Maricopa

Arizona Supreme Court

Decided January 19, 1989No. CV-87-0070-PRPublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolohan, Justice

(Retired).

We granted the plaintiffs’ petition for review to determine the nature and extent of a psychiatrist’s duty to third parties injured by the psychiatrist’s patient. The plaintiffs filed a tort action against the defendants for injuries inflicted on Robert Hamman by John Carter, a patient of the defendant, Dr. Manuel Suguitan. The superior court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the lower court in part and reversed in part. 161 Ariz. 53, 775 P.2d 1117 (App.1987).

FACTS

The facts are a matter of great dispute between the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
  2. Tarasoff v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Thompson v. County of AlamedaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Ontiveros v. BorakArizona Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Petersen v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1983

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

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Turner v. JordanTennessee Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Hartford Insurance v. Manor Inn of Bethesda, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1994
  3. Arnold v. Arizona Department of Health ServicesArizona Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Emerich v. Philadelphia Center for Human Development, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  5. Estates of Morgan v. Fairfield Family Counseling CenterOhio Supreme Court · 1997

31 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