Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California

Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California - Tarasoff...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California 17 Cal. 3d 425 (1976) Fact: Operative Facts: A psychologist was in a session with his patient when the patient mentioned that he was going to kill Tatiana Tarasoff. After being told that, the psychologist had officers arrest and detain him until he was deemed sane and reasonable. After being released, the psychologist never warned the parents of the person who the patient said he was going to kill. However, the patient did end up killing Tatiana, and now the parents are suing the psychologist for failure to warn. Issue: Whether the psychologist had a duty to warn the parents of a potential victim Rule: There is only a duty to warn when there is a special relationship between the parties, and the danger seems to be likely. Rational: The court took into consideration the psychologist’s confidentiality agreement with the patient, and also the fact that, many times people say they will kill someone, but usually end up not doing so. However, in this set of facts, the psychologist actually told police officers and had them detain his patient.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 12/20/2011 for the course TORTS 131 taught by Professor Keller during the Fall '11 term at Western State Colorado University .

Page1 / 2

Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California - Tarasoff...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online