Horak v. Biris
130 Ill.App.3d 140, 58 A.L.R. 4th 965, 474 N.E.2d 13 (1985)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A social worker or psychotherapist commits actionable malpractice by engaging in a sexual relationship with a patient's spouse during the course of marital counseling, as this conduct breaches the duty of care owed to the patient.
Facts:
- In February 1978, Dorothy Horak began receiving psychological counseling for marital difficulties from Dean Biris, a certified social worker.
- During his sessions with Dorothy, Biris obtained significant personal information about her husband, Harry J. Horak, Jr., and their marital relationship.
- At Biris's request, Harry Horak began a course of treatment with Biris in October 1978 to address his own emotional well-being and marital issues.
- Harry Horak developed a close and confidential relationship with Biris, communicating numerous private facts about his life, personality, and marriage.
- While providing marital counseling to both Harry and Dorothy Horak, Biris engaged in a sexual relationship with Dorothy Horak.
- Biris continued to provide therapy to Harry Horak after becoming sexually involved with his wife, without disclosing the conflict of interest.
Procedural Posture:
- Harry J. Horak, Jr. filed an amended complaint against Dean Biris in the circuit court of Kane County, Illinois (a trial court), alleging professional malpractice and negligence.
- Biris filed a motion to dismiss the malpractice and negligence counts, arguing that Illinois law did not recognize a cause of action for social worker malpractice, based on the precedent in Martino v. Family Service Agency.
- The trial court judge granted the motion to dismiss, stating he was bound by the Martino precedent, but noted his disagreement with its reasoning.
- Horak voluntarily non-suited his remaining counts to create a final, appealable order on the dismissed malpractice counts.
- Horak (as appellant) appealed the trial court's dismissal to the Illinois Appellate Court, Second District.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a cause of action for social worker malpractice exist in Illinois for a therapist's professional misconduct, such as engaging in sexual relations with a patient's spouse during the course of marital counseling?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Hopf
Yes. A cause of action for social worker malpractice exists under these facts. The court rejected the reasoning of a prior case, Martino v. Family Service Agency, which had refused to recognize such a tort. The court reasoned that malpractice is professional misconduct, and its elements are the same as any negligence action: duty, breach, causation, and damages. A duty of care arises from the therapist-patient relationship, which requires the therapist to act only in ways calculated to improve the patient's well-being and to refrain from conduct carrying a foreseeable risk of harm. This duty was breached when the defendant engaged in sexual relations with the plaintiff's wife while counseling both of them, particularly through the mishandling of the 'transference phenomenon.' The court held that even though the sexual acts were with the wife, the defendant's duty extended to the plaintiff because both were patients seeking to improve their marriage, making harm to one's treatment a foreseeable harm to the other. Finally, the court noted that Illinois statutes regulating social workers imply a legislative intent to hold them to professional standards, supporting the recognition of this cause of action.
Analysis:
This case is significant for formally recognizing the tort of social worker malpractice in Illinois, thereby extending established principles of professional negligence to non-physician psychotherapists. By rejecting the precedent set in Martino, the court established that mental health professionals are held to a professional standard of care and can be held liable for breaches of that duty. The decision emphasizes the fiduciary nature of the therapist-patient relationship and clarifies that sexual misconduct, especially in the context of mishandling psychological principles like transference, constitutes a clear breach of professional duty with foreseeable harm to the patient.
Unlock the full brief for Horak v. Biris