T.M.B v. West Mont & State

Summary

The Court held that the State did not owe T.M.B. a nondelegable duty of care because her placement at West Mont was voluntary, the State lacked custody or control over her and West Mont, and no close, continuing relationship existed between the State and T.M.B. The Court held that West Mont did owe such a duty because its decades-long caretaker relationship with T.M.B. created an affirmative obligation to protect her, which could not be delegated to an employee. The judgment was affirmed as to the State, reversed as to West Mont, and remanded for further proceedings.