holding that suits for personal injuries based on negligent vehicular operation may be brought by parents against their unemancipated child, as well as by child against parent
How later courts described this case
- holding that suits for personal injuries based on negligent vehicular operation may be brought by parents against their unemancipated child, as well as by child against parent
- 5 Justices + 1 judge temporarily assigned
- supporting reciprocal rights for parent and child
- parents and children in auto negligence cases
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Clifford, J.
(concurring). My vote to affirm signifies no more than my agreement with the Court’s interpretation of France v. A.P.A. Transport Corp., 56 N. J. 500 (1970), as including the allowance of suits by a parent against an unemancipated minor child for the cause of action referred to in that opinion. I do not, at this point in this interlocutory proceeding, intimate any view on the underlying policy *72 considerations affecting the doctrine of intra-family immunity as expressed in Koplik v. C. P. Trucking Corp., 27 N. J. 1 (1958); Hastings v. Hastings, 33 N. J. 247 (1960); Heyman v. Gordon, 40 N. J. 52 (1963); Franco v. Davis, 51 N. J. 237 (1968) and Immer v. Risko, 56 N. J. 482 (1970).