Case ID: ohio-st-2d_47/html/0012-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n     Celebrezze, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Rosenfeld, Appellee, v. Rosenfeld, Appellant. Pappas, Appellee, v. Pappas, Appellant. Kacik, Appellee, v. Kacik, Appellant.
    [Cite as Rosenfeld v. Rosenfeld (1976), 47 Ohio St. 2d 12.]
    (Nos. 75-144, 75-197 and 75-482
    Decided July 7, 1976.)
    
      
      Shapiro. Kendis £ Assoc. Co., L. P. A., and Mr. Sheldon E. Baskin, for appellee Bernard S. Rosenfeld.
    
      Messrs. Snyder, Neff £ Chamberlin, Mr. Owen C. Neff and Mr. Edward J. Kirk, for appellant Marcia Rosenfeld.
    
      Messrs. Tyack, Scott é Colley, Mr. Paul Scott, Mr. Thomas M. Tyack and Mr. G. Gary Tyack, for appelleé Ann M. Pappas.
    
      
      Mr! Stuart ¿41 Penis and 'Mr: William S. Lasarow, for appellant-Theodore C; Pappas: ■-
    - Mr. Timothy J. Kora.l, for appellee Leonard J. Kacik:
    
      Messrs. Lograsso & Longley, Mr. Peter P. Lograsso, Messrs. Loveland & Callard and Mr. James II. Callará, for appellant Dorothy M. Kacik.
   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. ,

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.