Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 148.975 (2026)

Duty To Warn; Limitation On Liability; Violent Behavior Of Patient

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Subdivision 1.Definitions.

(a) The definitions in this subdivision apply to this section.

(b) "Other person" means an immediate family member or someone who personally knows the client and has reason to believe the client is capable of and will carry out the serious, specific threat of harm to a specific, clearly identified or identifiable victim.

(c) "Reasonable efforts" means communicating the serious, specific threat to the potential victim and if unable to make contact with the potential victim, communicating the serious, specific threat to the law enforcement agency closest to the potential victim or the client.

(d) For purposes of this section, "licensee" includes practicum psychology students, predoctoral psychology interns, and individuals who have earned a doctoral degree in psychology and are in the process of completing their postdoctoral supervised psychological employment in order to qualify for licensure.

Subd. 2.Duty to warn.

The duty to predict, warn of, or take reasonable precautions to provide protection from, violent behavior arises only when a client or other person has communicated to the licensee a specific, serious threat of physical violence against a specific, clearly identified or identifiable potential victim. If a duty to warn arises, the duty is discharged by the licensee if reasonable efforts, as defined in subdivision 1, paragraph (c), are made to communicate the threat.

Subd. 3.Liability standard.

If no duty to warn exists under subdivision 2, then no monetary liability and no cause of action may arise against a licensee for failure to predict, warn of, or take reasonable precautions to provide protection from, a client's violent behavior.

Subd. 4.Disclosure of confidences.

Good faith compliance with the duty to warn shall not constitute a breach of confidence and shall not result in monetary liability or a cause of action against the licensee.

Subd. 5.Continuity of care.

Nothing in subdivision 2 shall be construed to authorize a licensee to terminate treatment of a client as a direct result of a client's violent behavior or threat of physical violence unless the client is referred to another practitioner or appropriate health care facility.

Subd. 6.Exception.

This section does not apply to a threat to commit suicide or other threats by a client to harm the client, or to a threat by a client who is adjudicated mentally ill and dangerous under chapter 253B.

Subd. 7.Optional disclosure.

Nothing in section 148.975 shall be construed to prohibit a licensee from disclosing confidences to third parties in a good faith effort to warn against or take precautions against a client's violent behavior or threat to commit suicide for which a duty to warn does not arise.

Subd. 8.Limitation on liability.

No monetary liability and no cause of action, or disciplinary action by the board may arise against a licensee for disclosure of confidences to third parties, for failure to disclose confidences to third parties, or for erroneous disclosure of confidences to third parties in a good faith effort to warn against or take precautions against a client's violent behavior or threat of suicide for which a duty to warn does not arise.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1993–2025 · leading case: Jerry Expose, Jr. v. Thad Wilderson & Assocs., P.A., Nina Mattson, 889 N.W.2d 279 (Minn. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Jerry Expose, Jr. v. Thad Wilderson & Assocs., P.A., Nina Mattson, 889 N.W.2d 279 (Minn. 2016). · cites it 39× “district court ruled that appellants are immune from liability under Minn.Stat. § 148.975 (2014), that they are immune from liability under the common law doctrine of absolute privilege, and that Expose consented to Mattson’s disclosures.”

State of Minnesota v. Jerry Expose, Jr., 872 N.W.2d 252 (Minn. 2015). · cites it 8× “See Minn. Stat. § 148.975 (2014). To dis7 charge the duty, N.”

Jerry Expose, Jr. v. Thad Wilderson & Assocs., P. A., Nina Mattson, 863 N.W.2d 95 (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 24× “The clinic and Mattson sought judgment in their favor on three grounds: (1) they are immune from liability on all claims based on a statute that imposes a duty to warn a third person of a serious threat of physical violence, see Minn.Stat. § 148.975 (2014); (2) they are immune…”

State of Minnesota v. Jerry Expose, Jr., 849 N.W.2d 427 (Minn. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 6× “See Minn. Stat. § 148.975 , subd. 2. The duty-to-warn statute requires a licensee to “take reasonable precautions to provide protection” to a potential victim of violent behavior “only when a client .”

Culberson v. Chapman, 496 N.W.2d 821 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 12× “The duty is discharged by the practitioner if reasonable efforts are made to communicate the threat to the potential victim.”

Bradley Ex Rel. Pope v. Ray, 904 S.W.2d 302 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995). “2 (West 1993); Minn. Stat. § 148.975 (1994); Mont.Code Ann.”

Jerry Expose, Jr. v. Thad Wilderson & Assocs., P.A., Nina Mattson (Minn. 2017). · cites it 39× “Immunity is not provided under Minn. Stat. § 148.975 (2014) for an unlicensed intern-therapist who discloses a patient's threat of physical violence against a specific person to law enforcement.”

State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Ryan James Martens, Appellant (Minn. 2025). · cites it 4× “at 257–59; see Minn. Stat. § 148.975 , subds. 1, 2 (2024).”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.