While in the hospital, plaintiff was assaulted by a psychiatric patient at the same hospital. Plaintiff sued the hospital claiming it failed to take reasonable measures to protect plaintiff from the assault which it should have anticipated from information available to the hospital’s psychiatrist. This decision holds that the trial court erroneously concluded that plaintiff was not entitled to discovery and potential use at trial of the hospital’s psychiatric records regarding the assaulter. If a reasonable psychiatrist would have concluded that the assaulter posed a danger of physical harm to others, no psychiatrist-patient privilege would apply. (Evid. Code 1024.) The assaulter’s constitutional right to privacy of those records had to give way to the compelling state interest in discovering the truth in litigation. The trial court could take appropriate measures to limit the disclosure in discovery and at trial.