The South Carolina Court of Appeals recently affirmed a trial court's grant of summary judgment favoring a homeowner who did not warn the family of neighboring children who visited of her husband's prior child sexual abuse conviction or propensities.
The decision in Roe v. Bibby was split, with Justices J. Konduros and J. Williams dissenting. The fact that the ruling was not unanimous indicates the South Carolina Supreme Court could very well reach a different conclusion, should it accept review of the case.
Although the underlying allegations are criminal in nature, two separate civil lawsuits - one against the alleged molester/husband and the second against his wife - are rooted in legal theories of negligence and premises liability. Plaintiffs obtained a default judgment against the alleged molester for assault, battery, false imprisonment and infliction of emotional distress (he did not respond at all to the litigation). However, his wife insisted she owed no duty of care to the children, and therefore could not be held liable. The courts agreed.