# Mauk v. Mauk

> Ohio Supreme Court · July 25, 1984 · 12 Ohio St. 3d 156

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6758510

## Case

- **Full name:** Mauk v. Mauk
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** July 25, 1984
- **Citations:** 12 Ohio St. 3d 156; 12 Ohio B. 226; 466 N.E.2d 166; 1984 Ohio LEXIS 1190
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Locher
- **Judges:** Brown, Celebrezze, Holmes, Locher, Sweeney
- **Cited by:** 11 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Overruled by Kirchner v. Crystal, 15 Ohio St. 3d 326 (1984).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6758510

## Opinion text

Locher, J.,
concurring. I wholeheartedly concur in the majority opinion and decision herein. As I stated in my concurrence in Bonkowsky v. Bonkowsky (1982), 69 Ohio St. 2d 152, 155 [ 23 O.O.3d 188 ]: “The family is the *160 basic social unit.” We should zealously protect our greatest national treasure, the family institution. The court is correct today in not rushing to join the so-called trend towards abrogation of family immunity. The reasons supporting the doctrine are as viable today, especially under the present circumstances, as they were when Teramano v. Teramano (1966), 6 Ohio St. 2d 117 [ 35 O.O.2d 144 ], was decided. To hold otherwise would deal another blow to those fighting the glorious battle to support the family.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6758510. Public record. Not legal advice.