Rosenfeld v. Rosenfeld
Rosenfeld v. Rosenfeld, Appellant Pappas v. Pappas, Appellant Kacik v. Kacik
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Per Curiam.
The sole factor and consideration which distinguishes these cases from the analysis in Nokes v. Nokes (1976), 47 Ohio St. 2d 1 , .decided this day, -is that such support order was formulated by incorporating parental separation agreements -into .the divorce decree. :■
Inasmuch as under Ohio law, a separation agreement of the parties-loses its nature, as a .contract the'moment it is adopted by the court and incorporated into a decree of divorce, we find that such distinguishing factor is of insufficient force to prevent the application hereto of the principles enunciated in N olees.
Therefore,-in light-of Nglees, the judgment in case No. 75-197 is affirmed and'the judgments in cases Nos. 75-144 and 75-482 are reversed.
Judgment affirmed in case No. 75-197-.
Judgments reversed in cases Nos. 75-144 and 75-482.
0 ’Neill,, C. J.," Potter, Stern, W.' Brown and P. Brown, JJ., concur.. . Corrigan and Celebrezze,-JJ., dissent. ■ Potter, J., of the Sixth Appellate District- .sitting fob Herbert, J. ,
Dissent
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Celebrezze, J.,
dissenting. I dissent from the judgments herein for the reasons expressed in my dissenting opinion in Nokes v. Nokes (1976), 47 Ohio. St. 2d 1, 9, decided this day.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 8 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.