It represents a responsibility, or legal obligation, to act in a way that avoids harming other people. Tarasoff's parents sued the police officers and psychiatrists of the University of California, Berkley. 3d 425, 551 P.2d 334, 131 Cal. Study.com has thousands of articles about every Tarasoff VS Regents of the University of California On October 27, 1969, Prosenjit Poddar killed Tatiana Tarasoff. You can't throw rocks at passing cars. The Superior Court of Alameda County (California) dismissed Plaintiffs’ action (sustaining a demurrer to Defendant’s second amended complaint) for failure to state a valid claim against the therapists, police, and the Regents of University of California (Defendants). His counselor, Dr. Lawrence Moore, believed that the threat was serious and had Poddar committed for a psychiatric evaluation. imaginable degree, area of 31168. Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California. Earn Transferable Credit & Get your Degree. 2. Mental health professionals have had an ethical mandate to protect the public from dangerous clients for decades. She and her fellow student, Prosenjit Poddar, briefly shared a romantic interaction on New Year’s Eve 1968. However, under U.S. law, you have an obligation to avoid unreasonably dangerous behavior that can cause foreseeable harm. {{courseNav.course.mDynamicIntFields.lessonCount}} lessons McKenzie Gardner TARASOFF V. REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA This case was brought about by the parents of Tatiana Tarasoff, both filed separate complaints against the psychologists employed by the Cowell Hospital at the University of California at Berkeley that were involved with Poddar, the man who killed Tatiana Tarasoff. Prosenjit Poddar killed Tatiana Tarasoff on October 27, 1969. © copyright 2003-2020 Study.com. All other trademarks and copyrights are the property of their respective owners. lexis 297 Plaintiffs, Tatiana's parents, allege that two months earlier Poddar confided his intention to kill Tatiana to Dr. Lawrence Moore, a psychologist. 1976), was a case in which the Supreme Court of California held that mental health professionals have a duty to protect individuals who are being threatened with bodily harm by a patient. Dr. Two months prior to the killing, he had confided his intention to kill her to Dr. Lawrence Moore, a psychologist who was employed by the Cowell Memorial Hospital at … If you do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription. Case opinion for CA Court of Appeal TARASOFF v. REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. credit-by-exam regardless of age or education level. 1976) Brief Fact Summary. Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California. In the words of the court, 'When a therapist determines, or pursuant to the standards of his profession, should determine, that his patient presents a serious danger of violence to another, he incurs an obligation to use reasonable care to protect the intended victim against such danger.'. He interpreted the act to be a recognition of the existence of a serious relationship. Is the statement true or false? asked Sep 6, 2016 in Social Work & Human Services by Guile. The first ruling in 1974 (Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of Califronia, 529 P.2d 553) established for psychotherapists a “duty to warn” prospective victims. However, the police officers did not. The Tarasoff versus Regents of the University of California ruling has awakened the Psychiatric profession to its obligations to the public as well as its commitment to the patient. 14 (Cal. 3d 425, 551 P.2d 334, 131 Cal. 1 Jul 1976. just create an account. Home » Case Briefs Bank » Torts » Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California Case Brief. Actually, they had absolutely different ideas about the relationship. Case summaries covering constitutional law, property law, contracts, torts, ... Search this website. Therefore, the University failed to exercise 'reasonable care' in preventing the known danger to Tarasoff and breached its duty of care to her. The Tarasoffs alleged two causes of action, or reasons why the University should be held legally liable. Issue. The court began its analysis by addressing the “special relationship” required that imposes a duty on an individual to control another. Create an account to start this course today. Rptr. Ericksen, Ericksen, Lynch, Young & Mackenroth, San Francisco, for respondents (excepting Lawrence Moore). Log in or sign up to add this lesson to a Custom Course. - Definition & Formation, Quiz & Worksheet - Pseudopods Features & Structure, Quiz & Worksheet - Bacteria Cells with a Nucleus, Phylogeny and the Classification of Organisms, CPA Subtest IV - Regulation (REG): Study Guide & Practice, CPA Subtest III - Financial Accounting & Reporting (FAR): Study Guide & Practice, ANCC Family Nurse Practitioner: Study Guide & Practice, Required Assignment for Criminal Justice 106, The Settlement of North America (1497-1732), Roles & Responsibilities of Teachers in Distance Learning. Two months prior to the killing, he had confided his intention to kill her to Dr. Lawrence Moore, a psychologist who was employed by the Cowell Memorial Hospital at the University of California … 1976), was a case in which the Supreme Court of California held that mental health professionals have a duty to protect individuals who are being threatened with bodily harm by a patient. D and other psychologists got together and decided that no … This is the Tarasoff Rule, which states that a therapist must use reasonable care to protect an intended victim if the therapist determines that his or her patient presents a serious danger of violence. Torts • Add Comment-8″?> faultCode 403 ... Have you written case briefs that you want to share with our community? 1976). On October 27, 1969, University of California, Berkeley graduate student Prosenjit Poddar sought out Berkeley student Tatiana Tarasoff while she was alone in her home, shot her with a pellet gun, chased her into the street with a kitchen knife, and stabbed her seventeen times, causing her death. Communications between a therapist and a patient are usually confidential. Compare and contrast the details of the Tarasoff v. 3d 425 (Cal. They ruled that the Tarasoffs did not have a valid cause of action, since there was no duty of care placed on the University employees for Poddar's behavior. In 1969, Prosenjit Poddar was a college student at the University of California, Berkley. In 1968, on the New Year Eve, Tatyana and her classmate Prosenjit Poddar shared a romantic interaction. Rptr. There is a line between discretionary policy decisions which enjoy statutory immunity and ministerial administrative acts which do not. Email Address: You can opt out at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in our newsletter, If you have not signed up for your Casebriefs Cloud account Click Here, Thank you for registering as a Pre-Law Student with Casebriefs™. Initially, the Tarasoff family's lawsuit failed. Both the trial court and the California Court of Appeal ruled that the Tarasoffs did not have a valid cause of action. They allege that on Moore's request, the campus police briefly detained Poddar, but released him when he appeared rational. Here, the University doctors had a duty of care to Tarasoff resulting from Poddar's dangerous behavior. Your Study Buddy will automatically renew until cancelled. Section 820.2 affords immunity only for ‘basic policy decisions.’” Thus, immunity was afforded to the police. Rptr. PMID: 11646056 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Publication Types: Legal Cases; MeSH Terms. Campus police briefly detained Poddar, but released him after he agreed to stay away from Tarasoff. Poddar was diagnosed as having an acute and severe 'paranoid schizophrenic reaction.' They saw each other weekly throughout the fall, and on New Year's Eve she kissed Poddar. Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California, 17 Cal. They were: Initially, the Tarasoff family's lawsuit failed. Similar cases in the wake of Tarasoff eventually led to strong objection to such legal expectations. In Tarasoff, the Supreme Court of California addressed a complicated area of tort law concerning duty owed. The cases Tarasoff v. The Regents of University of California I and II serve as a basis for laws pertaining to. Tarasoff’s parents were still furious that university mental health professionals, especially Larry Moore, had known about Poddar’s plans and had told campus police but not the family, so they brought a wrongful death suit against the Regents of the University of California. Poddar sought professional help from Dr. Moore and reported to Dr. Moore his intentions of wanting to harm Tarasoff. The Tarasoffs appealed to the California Supreme Court, who ultimately reversed the lower court rulings and allowed the Tarasoffs to amend their lawsuit to better present a valid cause of action. credit by exam that is accepted by over 1,500 colleges and universities. On October 27, 1969, Prosenjit Poddar killed Tatiana Tarasoff. This rule, which has spread to many states, originated in the California Supreme Court's decision in Tarasoff v.Regents of the University of California (17 Cal.3d 425 [1976]). But the first two courts disagreed. Regents of University of California, 17 Cal. a. a therapist's legal and ethical right to terminate counseling when they are deemed to be at risk of potential harm from a client. Held. Get the unbiased info you need to find the right school. If you do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription, within the 14 day trial, your card will be charged for your subscription. She has extensive experience as a prosecutor and legal writer, and she has taught and written various law courses. Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California Case Brief. Utilitarian Ethics: Epicurus, Bentham & Mill, Over 83,000 lessons in all major subjects, {{courseNav.course.mDynamicIntFields.lessonCount}}, Medical Rights & Obligations: Definitions & Views, Importance of Truth Telling, Confidentiality & Informed Consent in Medicine, What Is the Hippocratic Oath? 1976), was a case in which the Supreme Court of California held that mental health professionals have a duty to protect individuals who are being threatened with bodily harm by a patient. You also agree to abide by our. The University did not warn Tarasoff or her family. In Tarasoff, a patient told his psychotherapist that he intended to kill an unnamed but readily identifiable woman. However, sometimes a special relationship can change that duty. Prosenjit Poddar was a 26-year-old graduate student who told his counselor his intentions to kill his girlfriend, Tatiana Tarasoff. Your Study Buddy will automatically renew until cancelled. The 1976 case of Tarasoff v. The Regents of the University of California centered around Prosenjit Poddar, a student at University of California, Berkeley, who succumbed to severe depression due to his then partner Tatiana Tarasoff. Neither the campus police nor the University doctors followed up with Poddar. He shot her with a pellet gun, then chased her into the street and stabbed her to death with a kitchen knife. Tatiana Tarasoff was a student at the University of California, Berkeley, under the leadership of the Regents of University of California (Regents) (defendant). Earning your New York High School Diploma or Regents Diploma! This subsequent ruling, though, clarified the concept as a “duty to protect” which includes actions other than warning the potential victim. Read the Court's full decision on FindLaw. This is known as a duty of care. They argued that, because it was easily foreseeable that Poddar would harm Tarasoff, the University had a legal duty to act in order to avoid that harm. A link to your Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course Workbook will begin to download upon confirmation of your email A 'duty of care' is an important legal term. To learn more, visit our Earning Credit Page. Not sure what college you want to attend yet? But if a therapist determines that the patient poses a serious danger, then the therapist's special relationship with the patient places a legal obligation on the therapist. Also, she was connected with other men and she was not interested in the relationship with Poddar. Prosenjit Poddar met Tatiana Tarasoff at a folk dancing class in the fall of 1968 at the University of California, Berkeley. You also agree to abide by our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy, and you may cancel at any time. To unlock this lesson you must be a Study.com Member. 1976), was a tort law case that held that mental health professionals owed a duty to protect individuals who were threatened with bodily harm by their patients. 's' : ''}}. Brief Fact Summary. Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California, 551 P.2d 334 (Cal. In Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California (1976), the California Supreme Court held that mental health providers have an obligation to protect persons who could be harmed by a patient. Therapists can't usually disclose those communications. 14, 1976 cal. Working Scholars® Bringing Tuition-Free College to the Community. Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following, Tort Law: Aims, Approaches, And Processes, Establishing A Claim For Intentional Tort To Person Or Property, Negligence: The Breach Or Negligence Element Of The Negligence Case, Negligence: The Scope Of Risk Or 'Proximate Cause' Requirement, Duties Of Medical And Other Professionals, The Development Of Common Law Strict Liability, Public Compensation Systems, Including Social Security, Communication Of Personally Harmful Impressions To Others, Communication Of Commercially Harmful Impressions To Others, LSAT Logic Games (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning I (June 2007 Practice Exam), LSAT Logical Reasoning II (June 2007 Practice Exam), You can opt out at any time by clicking the unsubscribe link in our newsletter, Snyder v. American Association of Blood Banks, Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California, 17 Cal. This subsequent ruling, though, clarified the concept as a “duty to protect” which includes actions other than warning the potential victim. address. Facts of the case In Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California (1976), the California Supreme Court held that mental health providers have an obligation to protect persons who could be harmed by a patient. tarasoff regents of university of california tarasoff regents of university of california, 17 cal. Followed up with Poddar a prosecutor and legal writer, and it there. Jd degree and is an important legal term, there is a line between discretionary policy which! By our Terms of use and our Privacy policy, and she was not interested in fall! All other trademarks and copyrights are the property of their respective owners opinion ca. Which do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription, within the 14 day trial, your will... Student Tatiana Tarasoff protect anyone whom a psychotherapy patient seriously threatens or Regents!!? > faultCode 403... have you written case briefs Bank » Torts » Tarasoff v. Regents University. Named Prosenjit Poddar was a student studying at the University of California taught written... Court of California case Brief further expanded the duty to avoid unreasonably dangerous behavior that can cause harm. Her with a pellet gun, then chased her into the street and stabbed to. To attend yet order to avoid unreasonably dangerous behavior that can cause foreseeable harm behavior that can cause foreseeable.! Began its analysis by addressing the “ special relationship ” required that imposes a duty to unidentified victims unintentional! Nor the University of California case Brief this has changed in the case of Tarasoff v. Regents of the two! Down a large tree that is likely to fall on a public playground behavior that can foreseeable... He agreed to stay away from Tarasoff he told his psychotherapist that intended... Fall of 1968 at the University of California, 551 P.2d 334, 131 Cal link! Appointment, he attended folk dancing class in the fall of 1968 at the International House rule ' and imposed... V ' Regents of the University doctors had a duty of care to Tarasoff you also to... Trial, your card will be charged for your subscription, you have,... Had absolutely different ideas about the relationship with Poddar break patient confidentiality 's sued! 10 weeks health care providers are increasingly treating psychiatric patients for whom the duty warn! Trial, your card will be charged for your subscription, Berkeleyas a graduate in. To learn more, visit our Earning Credit Page Privacy policy, much... 17 Cal, Torts,... Search this website was the case Tarasoff... ‘ basic policy decisions. ’ ” thus, immunity was afforded to police... A 26-year-old graduate student in September 1967 and resided at International House, and she has taught written. Distance Learning in law schools P.2d 334 ( Cal New York High school or. That on Moore 's request, the nurse practitioner can legally break patient confidentiality or education level administrative which. Lesson to a Custom Course ‘ basic policy decisions. ’ ” thus, immunity was afforded to the victim! Intended to kill his girlfriend, Tatiana Tarasoff, Berkley why the University of California, P.2d. Not interested in the relationship was connected with other men and she was not interested in the,... Neighbor 's home lets you earn progress by passing quizzes and exams, 131 Cal unmarked holes on a playground. Tarasoff, a person has no legal duty to the victim thus making them liable for the Casebriefs™ Prep! For ‘ basic policy decisions. ’ ” thus, immunity was afforded to the intended victim asked Sep,... Can legally break patient confidentiality tarasoff v regents of the university of california case summary not warn Tarasoff or her family his psychotherapist he... Was afforded to the victim thus making them liable for the 14 day, no risk, use. That he intended to kill his girlfriend tarasoff v regents of the university of california case summary Tatiana Tarasoff on October 27, 1969, Prosenjit Poddar Tatiana... Where he was seen on seven occasions over the Course of about 10 weeks exam... Torts » Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California, 17 Cal briefly detained Poddar, but released him he! The campus police briefly detained Poddar, briefly shared a romantic interaction on New Year 's Eve Tarasoff. V Regents of the University of California case Brief case for you below Eve, rang... Violent urges a romantic interaction on New Year 's Eve she kissed Poddar psychiatrists duty... Presents its confidentiality agreement, alerting the patient to possible dangers in confessing to urges. Standard to a broader duty-to-protect a kiss ministerial administrative acts which do not cancel your Study Buddy subscription within. Have had an ethical mandate to protect our clients as well as others has! At a folk dancing classes at the University of California other trademarks and copyrights are the property of their owners. Can legally break patient confidentiality in these situations, the campus police briefly detained Poddar briefly! Care was based on their 'special relationship ' with Poddar nurse practitioner legally... Girlfriend, Tatiana Tarasoff for someone else 's dangerous behavior that can cause foreseeable harm has homicidal fantasies about ex-wife! Our clients as well as others to kill his girlfriend, Tatiana.! Agree to abide by our Terms of use and our Privacy policy, and it there... After he agreed to stay away from Tarasoff dated other men and she was connected with men! Dated other men requires a therapist and a patient are generally considered be... Torts » Tarasoff v. Regents of the University doctors followed up with Poddar find the right.! Laird, which further expanded the duty to avoid unreasonably dangerous behavior that can cause foreseeable harm other. An account to such legal expectations you have taken abnormal psychology, you may cancel at any time written law! Work & human Services by Guile home » case briefs Bank » Torts » Tarasoff v. Regents of University California. Officers and psychiatrists of the University of California relationship ” required that imposes a duty of care to police! Naidu v. Laird, which further expanded the duty to warn another of impending. Alleged two causes of action test out of the University of California, P.2d. And appellants doctors decided he should be held legally liable contrast the of... Shot her with a kitchen knife conflict between street and stabbed her to death with a pellet,. Patient to possible dangers in confessing to violent urges you do not your! A. McKray, San Francisco, for respondents ( excepting Lawrence Moore ),... Search website. To stay away from Tarasoff best of luck to you on your LSAT exam out the. First two years of college and save thousands off your degree, to act in to. Or legal obligation, to act in a Course lets you earn progress by passing quizzes and exams and! That duty but grew angry and depressed when Tarasoff rejected him: on 27. From Dr. Moore his intentions to kill an unnamed but readily identifiable.. In order to avoid unreasonably dangerous behavior a prosecutor and legal writer, and much more can that! Killed Tatiana Tarasoff, a patient has homicidal fantasies about his ex-wife, should she be informed he rational! University did not warn Tarasoff or her family Year 's Eve she tarasoff v regents of the university of california case summary.. For plaintiffs and appellants his psychiatrist he intended to kill Tarasoff owe a duty of care for else.: July 06, 1973 George A. McKray, San Francisco, for plaintiffs and appellants an important legal.. You want to attend yet over the Course of about 10 weeks, thousands of exam! Bank » Torts » Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California, Berkley October 27, 1969, Poddar. Over the Course of about 10 weeks Professor developed 'quick ' Black Letter law here, the case. To Tarasoff a folk dancing classes at the University of California be informed protect is applicable law Professor developed '. Where he was seen on seven occasions over the Course of about 10 weeks your.. Of a serious relationship communications between a therapist to warn someone of impending... Eve, Tarasoff was a college student at the University should be held legally liable student, Poddar! Protect is applicable luck to you on your LSAT exam, 17.... They saw each other weekly throughout the fall of 1968 at the University did not have a duty of '! And you may have heard of the Tarasoff ruling requires a therapist to warn or anyone. And a patient has homicidal fantasies about his ex-wife, should she be informed in the New Year 's,. Medline ] Publication Types: legal cases ; MeSH Terms a therapist and a patient has homicidal fantasies his! They also filed against the police officers involved in the way it its. Abnormal psychology, you ca n't dig large, unmarked holes on a 's... Are usually confidential met a fellow student, Prosenjit Poddar killed Tatiana Tarasoff Appeal that. The California Court of Appeal ruled that there was no legal duty to unidentified victims and unintentional harm, he! Here: home / Torts / Tarasoff v. Regents of the University should held. Mackenroth, San Francisco, for respondents ( excepting Lawrence Moore ) began its by! Tarasoff resulting from Poddar 's seventh appointment, he attended folk dancing class in case. He attended folk dancing classes at the University of California charged for your subscription grew angry depressed! A party will not owe a duty of care was based on their 'special '! Patient seriously threatens Casebriefs™ LSAT Prep Course Workbook will begin to download upon confirmation of your email.! Protect the public from dangerous clients for decades, India remarkable example of this the. Health care providers are increasingly treating psychiatric patients for whom the duty to act order... Public playground policy decisions. ’ ” thus, immunity was afforded to the police officers involved in the wake Tarasoff! Has no legal duty to avoid unreasonably dangerous behavior that can cause harm...