is incomplete. As an exception to this general principal, a state may be liable for its failure to protect its citizens against private violence when the state (1) enters into a “special relationship” with the plaintiff or (2) creates a danger which results in foreseeable injury to a discrete plaintiff. See Ye v. United States, 484 F.3d 634, 637 (3d Cir.2007); Kneipp v. Tedder, 95 F.3d 1199, 1205 (3d Cir.1996). 1. Special Relationship Exception While a government entity generally does not have a constitutional obligation to protect citizens from the conduct of private individuals, the Constitution does “impose[] upon the State affirmative duties of care and protection” where a “special relationship” exists between the state 374, 379-80 (E.D.Pa.1995), aff'd, 91 F.3d 125 (3d Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>). Relevant to this action, the Third Circuit
holding that a person has standing to bring suit under the civil rights act if she or he can show that she or he was punished for trying to vindicate the rights of minorities holding that state can restore civil rights either affirmatively or automatically individually or generally holding that the state must affirmatively act to curtail the individuals freedom such that he or she can no longer care for him or herself holding that an individual can waive any process to which he or she has a right holding that an expert can comply with the timing requirement if an experts research even after his or her deposition revealed that the standard of care in his or her community was the same or similar to the standard of care in the community in which he or she is testifying when the injury occurred