# Townsend v. Townsend

> Supreme Court of Missouri · April 15, 1986 · 708 S.W.2d 646

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9684062

## Case

- **Full name:** Diana TOWNSEND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James E. TOWNSEND, Defendant-Respondent
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Missouri
- **Decided:** April 15, 1986
- **Citations:** 708 S.W.2d 646; 1986 Mo. LEXIS 275
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Donnelly
- **Judges:** Rendlen, Higgins, Billings, Welliver, Robertson, Blackmar, Donnelly
- **Cited by:** 37 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9684062

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining the prohibition of spouses from suing each other as resting on the reasoning that, because husband and wife are a single unit, allowing spouses to sue would be tantamount to party suing himself or herself
- holding that wife, claiming intentional tort by husband when he allegedly shot her, was not barred by inter-spousal immunity doctrine from bringing a tort action against husband

## Opinion text

DONNELLY, Judge,
dissenting.
In Ebel v. Ferguson, 478 S.W.2d 334, 336 (Mo. banc 1972), the following statement was made: “V.A.M.S. 1.010, by adopting the common law, implants in Missouri the common law concept that a wrongful act between spouses does not give rise to a cause of action.”
I have come to believe that such statement is erroneous because it cannot be said with certainty that interspousal immunity was a part of the common law prior to the year 1607. See Osborne v. Purdome, 244 S.W.2d 1005, 1011 (Mo. banc 1951).
Therefore, I do not argue that this Court is without power to abrogate interspousal immunity in Missouri. I do argue that the power should be exercised with some evidence of restraint. I merely submit that the question of abolishing interspousal immunity should be decided by the people or by their elected representatives and not by this Court,
i respectfully dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9684062. Public record. Not legal advice.