Self v. Self
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, J.
The sole problem involved in this ease is whether California should continue to follow the rule of inter-spousal immunity for intentional torts first announced in this state in 1909 in the case of Peters v. Peters, 156 Cal. 32 [103 P. 219, 23 L.R.A. N.S. 699]. Because the reasons upon which the Peters case was predicated no longer exist, and because of certain legislative changes made in recent years, we are of the opinion that the rule of the Peters case should be abandoned. In other words, it is our belief that the rule should be that one spouse may sue the other in tort, at least where…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Thompson v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Spellens v. SpellensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- Klein v. KleinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- Zaragosa v. CravenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Flores v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by59 opinions
- Brown v. MerloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- Rodriguez v. Bethlehem Steel Corp.California Supreme Court · 1974
- Gibson v. GibsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Freehe v. FreeheWashington Supreme Court · 1972
- Klein v. KleinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.