Karam v. Allstate Insurance

The reasons given by this court in this case to support the parental immunity for negligent acts by a parent toward a child, namely, “that of public policy in the prevention of fraud and collusion” and preservation of domestic peace, harmony and tranquility, are the same flimsy rationalizing and irrelevant nonsense used to give continuing life to the in-terspousal immunity doctrine in Bonkowsky v. Bonkowsky (1982), 69 Ohio St. 2d 152. Just as Justice William B. Brown in his dissents in Varholla v. Varholla (1978), 56 Ohio St. 2d 269, 271-275, and Bonkowsky, swpra, at pages 156-162, recognized…