Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

COMMONWEALTH EX REL. NICHOLSON v. GROFF (07/19/51)

July 19, 1951

COMMONWEALTH EX REL. NICHOLSON
v.
GROFF



COUNSEL

James N. Lafferty, Philadelphia, for appellant.

J. Leon Rabben, Philadelphia, for appellee.

Before Rhodes, P. J., and Hirt, Reno, Dithrich, Ross, Arnold and Gunther, JJ.

Author: Ross

[ 169 Pa. Super. Page 13]

ROSS, Judge.

This is an appeal by a father, John Russell Groff, from the refusal of the court below to vacate an order for the support of his minor daughter, Winifred.

On January 29, 1948, appellant's divorced wife obtained an order on him in the Municipal Court of Philadelphia to pay $30 a week for the support of their daughter. On June 23, 1949, the daughter reached the age of 18 years, and on July 21, 1949, appellant filed a petition to have the order vacated. After two hearings the court refused the petition, and this appeal followed.

After the first hearing, the order was continued so that the girl might continue her studies in high school where, at 18, she was then a freshman. She has since left school, however, and counsel for the appellee makes

[ 169 Pa. Super. Page 14]

    no claim for support for the purpose of allowing her to continue her education.

Appellant's position is that this daughter is capable of self-support. On the basis of considerable testimony and observation, including records of tests made by psychologists, the court found that although the girl appears normal and healthy, of splendid appearance, and is apparently employable in many branches of industry or of business, she is 'unemployable, not because of mental deficiency, but because of her inability to grasp the realities of life.'

Since leaving school, she has held various types of positions for short periods of time. Prior to the initial hearing, she was employed for almost four weeks as a typist by the Moreland Manufacturing Company. A representative of the company testified that her work had been satisfactory but that she had been laid off due to slackening down of the work. She worked for the Loyalty Group Insurance Company for two weeks, at the end of which time she was discharged. Another position was with a dry cleaning establishment. Still another was in Chestnut Hill for one day, as to which she testified, 'I didn't like it, so the girl they had came back.' Between the hearings she worked for Sun Ray Drug Company for approximately three weeks but was asked to leave because she 'just didn't do the work as they wanted me to'. During this time and for somewhat more than a week afterward, she lived away from home but she became ill and ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.