Read the article regarding Levine v. Werboff and review the Cardozo View flowchart. Was the court's ruling correct? Why?

ADVERTISEMENT AMERICAN LAWYER.COM Exclusive Webinar 150 Which firms made the Am Law 100 Uy in 2010? 2010 Hosted by Editor-in-Chiet Aric Press per te oomberg ARSIMINE View Now On-Demand Font Steella Alleged 'Other Man' Had Duty to Tell Husband if He Had Herpes, Says Judge Noeleen G. Welder New York Low JournalJune 07, 2010 Print Share Email Reprints & Permissions Post a Comment A man who says he contracted a sexually transmitted disease after his wife had an affair with her allegedly infected paychiatrist can bring a negligence action against the doctor, a state judge has rued. The man, Carl Levine, claimed that Dr. Robert Werbott had a duty to warn him that he had herpes simplex before having unprotected sex with Lovine's wife. Looking to common concepts of morality, logic, and ... the social consequences of Imposing the duty: Westchester County Supreme Court Justice Nicholas Colabella agreed that Werboff owed a reasonable duty of care to Mr. Levine. There is nothing unfair about extending such a duty of care to a spouse of the infected person," the judge wrote in Levine v. Werbolf, 24873/09 Ajuy ultimately would be responsible for deciding whether the psychiatrist was infected or had had an affals with Mr. Lovine's wife, Susan Bruce M. Brady of Callahan, Koster, Brady & Brennan, who represents Werboff, said he will appeal the ruing and expects to resolve the case on the merits. According to Mr. Levine, his wife sought help from Werboff in 2000 At some point, Wartoff, a New York Medical College graduate based in White Plains, allegedly "seduced Ms. Levine and had unprotected sex with her. However, the doctor did not tell Ms. Levine he had herpes, according to the complaint. Mr. Levine claims his wife subsequerdly contracted an acthe case of herpes from Werboff and passed it on to him. According to the complaint, Mr. Levine did not have herpes (HSP) before his wie slept with Worboff and did not have sex with anyone other than his wife from the time he did not have HSP until he contracted HSP. In 2009. Mr. Levine sued Worboff for intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, fraud, and statutory and common-law negligence "TAs a result of the acts of the Defendant, Carl Levine has been rendered sick, sore and disabled and "Buffered, among other things, Infection with HSP, numerous internal Injuries; illness and sickness, sovere fright, shock pain, discomfort, and arodety, and is informed and believes ... that the Injuries are permanent." the complaint states. According to the Department of Health and Human Services' Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Web site, there is no cure for herpes, although antiviral medications can "shorten and prevent outbreaks over Try our NEW fast, easy-to-use, advanced search features. verdictsearch.com click here lawjobs.com TOP JOBS ATTORNEY CONFIDENTIAL SEARCH New York, NY PLAINTIFF CLASS ACTION ATTORNEY Meira Tan Denisa Packman Carton & Eborz, PC Wit Pains, New York MORE JOBS >> POST A JOB >> ( time DUHET NEW BOOK! The complete gulde to the sixtypes of state taxes affecting businesses: CLICK HERU Mr. Levine maintained that Werboff knew that Mr. Levine was stal sleeping with his wife and consequently "reasonably should have known that he would expose" Mr. Levine to herpes ... through Ms. Levine." On a motion to dismiss, Calabela refused to throw out Mr. Levine's common law negligence claims. He noted that the "judicial resistance to expanding a common law duty "grows out of practical concerns both about potentially limitless liability and about the unfairness of imposing liability for the acts of another." But the judge conduded that extending a duty to the spouse of a person infected by herpes "presends neither concern." "The extension here to a spouse is to a narrowly defined class of persons." Colabella wrote. Moreover, he held that extending the duty of care was not fair since the alleged tortleaser "is in the best position to prevent the disease's transmission and given that the potential for harm to the married person and his spouse is the same. The judge also held that Werboff faled to show that the daim for intentional infliction of emotional distress had been fled outside the one-year statute of limitations. Although Mr. Levine did not sure until more than two years after his wife discovered she had herpes. Colabella held that the relevant date was when the plaintiff, not Ms. Levine, discovered he had contracted the virus. However, in the absence of a relationship between plaintiff and defendant," the judge agreed with Werboft that Mr. Levine could not have relied on the allegedly misleading representations the psychiatrist made to Ms. Levine. In addition, Colabella held that the psychiatrist's actions did not constitute negligence per se. "Whle a violation of Public Health Law Section 2307 has been found to constitute negligence per se ... there is no statutory requirement that any waring or action be taken with respect to a sexual partner's other known or suspected sexual partners," Colabella wrote. He also threw out a daim for malpractice, finding that Mr. Levine had faded to demonstrate a basis for expanding the doctor-relationship to include plaintif." Dorothy M. Finger of Finger & Finger represented Mr. Levine. No Duty of Care Unforeseen Plaintiff Duty of Care Foreseen Plaintiff Zone of Danger Outside Zone of Danger