Legal Opinion
Frye v. Frye
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Decided March 11, 1986No. 98, September Term, 1985PublishedCited by 47 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CHARLES E. ORTH, Judge.
The doctrine usually called the parent-child immunity rule exists in Maryland. It evolved through judicial decision and has been followed for over half a century. We are now asked whether it should be abrogated by this Court. We do not believe that it should be.
I
George L. Frye, Jr., was driving an automobile owned by his wife, Barbara J. Frye and insured by Selected Risks Insurance Company, when it veered off the road and struck a culvert. Barbara and George L. Frye, III, their infant, unemancipated son, were injured. Barbara, individually and as guardian and next…
2Cases cited91 opinions
- Hewlett v. GeorgeMississippi Supreme Court · 1891
- Goller v. WhiteWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
- Holodook v. SpencerNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- Thompson v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
- Nolechek v. GesualeNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
86 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- Dubay v. IrishSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- State v. HawkinsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1992
- Bushey v. Northern Assurance Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1986
- Parler & Wobber v. Miles & Stockbridge, P.C.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2000
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.