Opinion

Appleton v. Appleton

  • 191 Pa. Super. 95
  • 155 A.2d 394
  • 1959 Pa. Super. LEXIS 496
Court
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
Nov 11, 1959
Status
Published
Author
Wright
On the bench
Wright, Rhodes, Weight, Woodside, Eevin, Watkins, Gunthee, Ervin
Cited by
7 cases
Authority
More cited than 8.7%

The opinion

Dissenting Opinion by

Wright, J.:

I respectfully dissent. Judge Gawthrop found as a fact, as did the Master, that appellee’s “present earning power is negligible”. This finding is fully supported by the evidence, and it is not our function to make a conjectural finding to the contrary. We have repeatedly stated that orders of the trial court in matters of this nature -will not be disturbed in the absence of a clear abuse of discretion. See Commonwealth ex rel. Trichon v. Trichon, 189 Pa. Superior Ct. 395 , 150 A. 2d 176 . My view is that appellant has failed to demonstrate an abuse of discretion in the instant case. Since the majority opinion mentions the children, it should perhaps be noted that appellee is *101 required, by virtue of a Delaware order, to pay appellant an additional fill.00 per month support for his two sons.

Ervin, J., joins in this dissent.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.