It's about time that this common sense step has been taken.
I'm 1000% behind this woman and am hoping she wins her case.
Men have been cheating on their wives for centuries and getting away with it. They have even profitted from no-fault divorce today, as it makes no distinction on custody and/or marital property issues for 'bad boy' behavior. A husband can be cheating on his wife for years and when she finally gets fed up with it and files for divorce, the cheater can still get custody of any children, alimony and a 50/50 split of marital property with no penalties whatsoever for his bad behavior...
Bad behavior get rewarded everyday of the week in this context.
A good example of this is Hallie Berry, whose husband cheated on her 29 times before she finally filed for divorce. YET he was still eligible for alimony, even though it was a short-term marriage, both had careers, no kids...
All I can say is Thank God Hallie you didn't have any kids with him. OTHERWISE you would have been facing the dreaded "Fed-ex" syndrome...
It's like PAS, the same but different...
Generally exhibited by greedy men trying to get custody so they can juice the mother for money, the state for tax credits and benefits; but most importantly they don't have to pay child support themselves. It's a dirty living but some men have to do it, as they are so worthless they aren't good for much else...
Anyway, I receive emails constantly from mothers who have told me they lost custody of their children to some empowered by the courts monster, who cheated on them constantly...AND when they finally dared to try and do something about it, they lose their children...
So we see where no-fault divorce has morphed into another tool used as a club by men against women.
Even though originally no-fault divorce was supposed to be about 'helping' women get out of abusive marriages easier...
As usual every law made to help women has been seized upon and misused by men to help themselves...
Well what else is new????
Anyway, allowing women to take these cases, of disease spreading through careless sexual behavior by cheaters, to civil court ensures that justice MIGHT finally be served.
Many will say that women can be taken to court as well under these circumstances and yes, that's true. But somehow I have a feeling that the vast majority of these cases will see men as defendants...as history has a way of repeating itself over and over and over again. Thus, I believe men will continue being the primary cheaters as they have been throughout the ages and I don't care how many 'empowered women' newspaper columns or magazine articles claim are out there cheating...
So we'll see, but for the time being I say THIS is a good thing for women. A very good thing.
Actually you should be able to take men to civil court for POTENTIALLY spreading an STD to you...POTENTIALLY...through irresponsible sex with someone they hardly know...
Again, a good thing to do to cheaters.
STD suit could set precedent in state
By Leslie Parrilla
A former San Luis Obispo County resident is suing her ex-husband, claiming he negligently infected her with a sexually transmitted disease in what experts say could be a precedent-setting case in California.
Legal experts say the case between Janet Smith and Patrick Neiland Smith is significant because many people do not realize passing on an STD could pose a legal liability.
The San Luis Obispo case could set a precedent because it may be the first in the state to be resolved after a California Supreme Court ruling this year stating that people are liable not only when they know they have an STD, but also when they should have known.
"People are not as careful perhaps as they need to be," said Loyola Law School professor John T. Nockleby. "People probably aren’t thinking about potential legal liability when they’re having casual sex."
The Smiths were married in 1979 and lived in San Luis Obispo County. They are completing divorce proceedings.
Janet Smith, 52, now a resident of Nevada, is asking for an unlimited amount of compensation in the lawsuit, claiming her ex-husband was unfaithful during their marriage, contracted the human papillomavirus, or HPV, and negligently infected her.
She underwent a hysterectomy and was left fearful of having contracted other STDs, the suit states.
Civil suits represent only one side of the story.
San Luis Obispo attorney Mark B. Connely, who is representing Patrick Neiland Smith, now a resident of Santa Barbara County, argued during a jury trial this week that his client did not negligently infect his ex-wife with HPV and that Smith did not know he had the virus.
The jury will decide whether Smith is negligent and whether he should have known he had an STD.
Nockleby said the Supreme Court decision in John B. v. the Superior Court of Los Angeles County "says you can sue somebody else for giving you an STD, not only if they know they have the STD, but if they had symptoms" that would have caused a reasonable person to go and find out whether they were infected.
That is something Nockleby believes the general public does not know.
"Not that I want to make sexual relationships about law, but I do think people who engage in casual sexual encounters ... need to know about this kind of thing," he said.
The Smith case is expected to continue with closing arguments today.
Leslie Parrilla can be reached at 783-7645.