In which of the following cases did the Court extend the Tarasoff requirement by deciding that information provided by a family member of an adult client and not by the client could trigger the "duty to protect" requirement?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

In Ewing v. Goldstein, the court extended the Tarasoff duty to protect by ruling that information from a family member, not just the client, could trigger the duty to warn or protect.

In Which of the Following Cases Did the Court Extend