Opinion
S128248
Filed November 10, 2004.
Prior report: Cal.App., 18 Cal.Rptr.3d 48.
Petition for review granted.
The court limited review to the following issues: (1) Under California law, may a person be held liable for failure to disclose to a sexual partner the fact that the person has a sexually transmissible disease only when the person actually knows he or she has a sexually transmissible disease (see Doe v. Roe (1990) 218 Cal.App.3d 1538, 267 Cal.Rptr. 564) or also when the person reasonably should have known he or she has such a disease? (2) If the duty to disclose is limited to situations in which a person actually knows he or she has a sexually transmissible disease, did the discovery permitted by the Court of Appeal in the present case violate either traditional standards of discovery (e.g., relevance) or constitutionally protected rights of privacy?
GEORGE, C.J., KENNARD, BAXTER, WERDEGAR, CHIN, BROWN, and MORENO, JJ., concur.