A wife aware of her husband's pedophilia has a duty to take reasonable steps to protect children who are likely to fall within his clutches. Neighbors alleged that the defendant assaulted their 12- and 15-year-old daughters in his car and home for a period of more than one year. His wife, claimed the neighbors, was aware of her husband's proclivity to molest children.

The alleged victims and their parents were next-door neighbors and friends of the couple. They told the court of their reasonable expectation that the wife would not knowingly expose them to the risk of sexual assault by her own husband. The wife, therefore, had a duty to warn her neighbors. Her failure to do so should be considered negligence.

A New Jersey trial court disagreed, holding that the public policy of strengthening the marital relationship would be weakened by imposing a duty to warn neighbors about her husband's pedophilia. The lawsuit was dismissed and the victim's parents appealed.

The appeals court considered the continuity and close social relationship between the families and concluded that the wife had a duty to take some kind of protective action, based upon the extent of her knowledge of her husband's activities and the foreseeability of harm. The court described the duty as potentially flexible, thereby dismissing the lower court's concern that the duty sought to be imposed included warning all of the neighbors. The evidence at trial could support an argument that the wife had a variety of safety options to exercise, short of full disclosure. The parameters of that duty should be defined by a jury.