# Mauk v. Mauk

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

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6758511

## 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 Holmes
- **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/6758511

## Opinion text

Holmes, J.,
concurring. I am able to concur in this majority opinion based upon the philosophy of my dissent in Dorsey v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (1984), 9 Ohio St. 3d 27, 31 , wherein I stated that the reasons for the continuance of the parental immunity doctrine pronounced recently in Karam v. Allstate Ins. Co. (1982), 70 Ohio St. 2d 227 [ 24 O.O.3d 327 ], were equally controlling at the time of writing Dorsey, and they are equally supportive now.
William B. Brown, J., dissenting. I dissent in the present case for the reasons which I have already articulated in my concurrence in Dorsey v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co. (1984), 9 Ohio St. 3d 27, 30 .
C. Brown, J., concurs in the foregoing dissenting opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6758511. Public record. Not legal advice.