|
CASE 3047 REVIEW DENIED Unless she has knowledge that a boy visiting her son has a propensity to commit acts of sexual misconduct, a woman who invites a teenaged girl into her home and promises the girl’s mother that she will supervise the activities of the teenagers has no duty to observe them continually or to take steps to protect the girl against sexual attack by the boy.CitationROMERO v SUPERIOR COURT (Teen Supervision) 89 CA4 1068 [See: RC Bishop v Superior Court 42 CA4 1556, T/AT 4/96; Chaney v Superior Court 39 CA4 152, T/AT 11/95; Rowland v Christian 69 C2 108; Weirum v RKO 15 C3 40; Juarez v Boy Scouts 81 CA4 377, T/AT 6/00]
|
|
