Klein v. Klein
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, J.
This ease involves the rule of interspousal immunity for personal torts. In this respect it is similar to Self v. Self, ante, page 683 [26 Cal.Rptr. 97, 376 P.2d 65], The instant ease, however, unlike the Self ease, in*693volves a negligent tort rather than an intentional one. We are of the opinion that insofar as interspousal liability for tort is concerned there is no logical or legal reason for drawing a distinction between the two, and that for that reason, the rule announced in Self v. Self, supra, is here controlling.
In the instant case, Thelma Klein filed her complaint against Joseph Klein…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Emery v. EmeryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- Spellens v. SpellensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- Borst v. BorstWashington Supreme Court · 1952
- Rozell v. RozellNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
- Peters v. PetersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by119 opinions
- Dillon v. LeggCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Brown v. MerloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- Rodriguez v. Bethlehem Steel Corp.California Supreme Court · 1974
- Gibson v. GibsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Immer v. RiskoSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1970
114 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.