The court ruled that, since the spouse owed no duty of care
to protect that third party from actions by her husband, the spouse had no liability towards that party.
The court ruled in this regard despite
allegations of knowledge on the part of the Defendant spouse that her husband, who had assaulted the Plaintiff, had engaged in past violence and had
failed to take his psychiatric medication. The court also rejected the allegation
that the spouse failed to assist her husband in recommencing taking
medication.
In light of its rulings that one spouse owed no duty to third parties to protect them from negligent conduct by the other spouse under the facts presented, the court granted the Defendant's Preliminary Objections and dismissed the Plaintiff's Complaint.
Anyone wishing to review this Opinion may click this LINK.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.