Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

California court expands liability for HIV infection
Reuters via Yahoo News ^ | 7/3/2006

Posted on 07/03/2006 9:08:16 PM PDT by garbageseeker

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - A person who has reason to believe he or she has HIV may be sued by sexual partners if they become infected, the California Supreme Court ruled on Monday, broadening the state's view of when liability arises from the disease.

Knowingly passing along HIV, which leads to AIDS, is already illegal in California and people who do so may be sued for damages in state court.

The California Supreme Court's decision widens the scope for law suits against sexual partners over negligent transmission.

In their decision, a majority of the court's justices held that they "cannot agree that persons who have reason to know they are infected with HIV, a gravely serious disease with no known cure, should be subject to a lesser duty of care than persons who have reason to know they are infected with other sexually transmitted diseases."

"In sum, we are not persuaded that California should be the first jurisdiction in the country to limit liability for the negligent transmission of HIV only to those who have actual knowledge they are HIV positive," the majority held.

Their decision addressed a lawsuit involving a married couple in which the wife and husband were both infected with HIV. Each charged the other with transmitting the disease.

The wife is seeking evidence from her husband's sexual history to establish he had reason to know of infection.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: aids; california; californiacourts; civilliability; crime; hiv; homosexualagenda; infection; liability
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

1 posted on 07/03/2006 9:08:19 PM PDT by garbageseeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: garbageseeker

California did something right??
Did hell indeed freeze over, sir?


2 posted on 07/03/2006 9:13:17 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (Taglines for sale or rent. Good "one liners", 50 cents.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

Is that odd?


3 posted on 07/03/2006 9:14:12 PM PDT by garbageseeker (It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.”Samuel Clemmens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Its about time.


4 posted on 07/03/2006 9:15:25 PM PDT by garbageseeker (It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.”Samuel Clemmens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: garbageseeker

Well, normally the offended party would be allowed to sue the geographically nearest person with an income over $120,000 per year. (Or the nearest large corporation with too many donations to the GOP.)


5 posted on 07/03/2006 9:20:41 PM PDT by Redcloak (Speak softly and wear a loud shirt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: garbageseeker

"A person who has reason to believe he or she has HIV may be sued by sexual partners if they become infected, the California Supreme Court ruled on Monday, broadening the state's view of when liability arises from the disease."



Is this one of those stories that is much, much bigger than it seems?

That might start altering behavior in the homosexual community, as fortunes and estates are transferred to young "dates" and their lawyers.


6 posted on 07/03/2006 9:30:42 PM PDT by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

This story was very hard to find.


7 posted on 07/03/2006 9:34:41 PM PDT by garbageseeker (It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.”Samuel Clemmens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: garbageseeker

It has never been proven that HIV leads to AIDS. This is a bald faced lie.


8 posted on 07/03/2006 10:48:24 PM PDT by freekitty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: garbageseeker
we are not persuaded that California should be the first jurisdiction in the country

What a bunch of namsy pamsies. For sure they made the right decision, but this is a very lame quote. If MA was the first jurisdiction would they have made a different decision? Sounds like they are playing politics.

9 posted on 07/03/2006 11:26:55 PM PDT by monkeyshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

Come on.


10 posted on 07/03/2006 11:34:56 PM PDT by garbageseeker (It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.”Samuel Clemmens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

Say that to the estimated 32 million people have died from AIDS since the beginning of the pandemic.


11 posted on 07/03/2006 11:37:11 PM PDT by garbageseeker (It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.”Samuel Clemmens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: garbageseeker
So does this mean that all of use that will probably never get HIV can sue the CDC for not declaring HIV/AIDS the true danger it is?
12 posted on 07/03/2006 11:37:22 PM PDT by SledgeCS (I say round up the Illegals, ship them back home and bill their country for the cost...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SledgeCS

I cant answer that. That a question for a judge to answer


13 posted on 07/03/2006 11:38:39 PM PDT by garbageseeker (It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.”Samuel Clemmens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: garbageseeker

Stories like this always seem to come out of San Fransicko.


14 posted on 07/03/2006 11:50:43 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

The California Supreme Court is in San Francisco. The Federal Ninth Circuit Court is in San Francisco also


15 posted on 07/04/2006 12:02:57 AM PDT by garbageseeker (It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.”Samuel Clemmens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

This is true.

What's more, in this case both the complainant and cross-complainant should be required to prove that he or she was NOT HIV positive prior to entering their relationship.

Thousands or millions of perfectly healthy people were walking around in blissful ignorance of their "HIV positive" condition prior to our ability to test for this virus. For decades. The epidemiology of HIV indicates that the virus has been riding human beings for decades, centuries or even millenia. The epidemiological curve is so flat it's hard to tell how old this common infection actually is.

It is possible, even likely, that one or the other of these people has had the HIV viral passenger since birth, since historically in utero infection was the most common means of transmission.


16 posted on 07/04/2006 12:06:14 AM PDT by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: garbageseeker

EXACTLY where they belong.


17 posted on 07/04/2006 12:07:23 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: garbageseeker

If you will introduce me to one of them, I'd be happy to say so myself, if I first can be told what he or she ACTUALLY died of.


18 posted on 07/04/2006 12:07:57 AM PDT by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

You have no complaints from me


19 posted on 07/04/2006 12:13:40 AM PDT by garbageseeker (It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.”Samuel Clemmens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

Really? I think I read somewhere that the correlation between HIV and AIDS is greater than the correlation between cigarettes and lung cancer. I know correlation does not equal causation, but come on....


20 posted on 07/04/2006 2:07:04 AM PDT by Balke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson