Strong v. Strong

Decision Date12 April 1954
Docket NumberNo. 3771,3771
PartiesSTRONG v. STRONG.
CourtNevada Supreme Court

Woodburn, Forman & Woodburn and Gordon R. Thompson, Reno, for appellant.

Pike & McLaughlin, Reno, Donn B. Downen, Jr., Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Upon petition for rehearing, appellant points out that in resting our decision upon the common-law rule that an unemancipated minor child cannot sue his parent in tort for personal injuries, we have disregarded a recognized exception to the rule.

That exception has to do with cases of intentional or willful acts on the part of the parent.

Appellant contends that since the complaint in this action alleges willful misconduct on the part of respondent a genuine issue has been raised as to whether the exception applies; and summary judgment was, therefore, improper.

The authorities cited by appellant to establish the exception to the general rule have to do with cases where the misconduct was deliberate and malicious, in one instance a case where one parent was shot and killed by the other. In our view such exception should not be held to apply to facts such as are before us where the case is based, as appellant concedes, primarily upon negligence and not malicious wrongdoing.

Rehearing denied.

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Eagan v. Calhoun, 109
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • 1 Septiembre 1996
    ... ... Glaskox, 614 So.2d 906 (Miss.1992) (abolishing parent-child immunity for motor torts); Strong v. Strong, 70 Nev. 290, 267 P.2d 240, reh'g denied, 70 Nev. 290, 269 P.2d 265 (1954) (common law doctrine of parent-child immunity barred an action ... ...
  • First Union Nat. Bank of N. C. v. Hackney, 277
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 15 Diciembre 1965
    ... ... 3 Strong, N.C. Index, Pleadings § 12, p. 627 ...         The questions presented are of first impression in this jurisdiction ... ...
  • Rupert v. Stienne
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court
    • 2 Diciembre 1974
    ...Morrissett v. Morrissett, 80 Nev. 566, 397 P.2d 184 (1964); Kennedy v. Kennedy, 76 Nev. 302, 352 P.2d 833 (1960), and Strong v. Strong, 70 Nev. 290, 267 P.2d 240, 269 P.2d 265 This case deals with the question of responsibility for injuries to one spouse caused by the negligent operation of......
  • Perkins v. Robertson
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 5 Abril 1956
    ... ... the rule that unemancipated minors cannot sue a parent, or one in loco parentis, also applies to wrongful death actions based on negligence, Strong by Woodburn v. Strong, 70 Nev. 290, 297 P.2d 240, 269 P.2d 265 ...         As to the causes of action alleging that the mother of the ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT