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.

WILLIAMS v. WILLIAMS (04/21/54)

April 21, 1954

WILLIAMS
v.
WILLIAMS



COUNSEL

Clyde P. Bailey, S. H. Reichman, Pittsburgh, for appellant.

I. Elmer Ecker, E. P. Curran, Pittsburgh, for appellee.

Before Rhodes, P. J., and Hirt, Ross, Gunther, Wright and Woodside, Jj.

Author: Woodside

[ 175 Pa. Super. Page 411]

WOODSIDE, Judge.

This is an appeal by the defendant from an order of the court below denying defendant's request for a reduction in the amount of alimony to be paid the appellee and further ordering the payment of counsel fees and witness fees incurred by the appellee.

On April 27, 1950 the lower court granted to plaintiff-appellee Syvella Williams, a divorce a mensa et thoro from the defendant-appellant, Stanley McD. Williams and awarded the plaintiff-appellee $4,800 yearly alimony with counsel fees in the total amount of $2,750, as well as $350 for the accountant who testified as her witness. No appeal was taken from this decree.

On December 21, 1951, the court by agreement of the parties, entered an order directing payment of arrearages and reducing the alimony to $325 per month until September 1, 1952 at which time it was again increased to $400 per month.

In May 1953 the plaintiff-appellee obtained a rule to show cause why an attachment should not issue against the defendant for failure to pay the order in full. Defendant obtained a rule to show cause why the order should not be reduced urging that arrearages had accumulated because of his inability to pay.

On July 10, 1953 the lower court ordered that the defendant pay the arrearages in ten days; that he continue to pay alimony in the sum of $400 per month; that he pay counsel fees to plaintiff's attorney in the sum of $900 within thirty days and witness fees to the plaintiff's accountant in the sum of $100 within sixty

[ 175 Pa. Super. Page 412]

    days. The defendant took an appeal to this court from the order.

The defendant-appellant's contention is that the order of the court below exceeded the limit of one-third of his income in violation of section 47 of the Act of May 2, 1929, P.L. 1237, 23 P.S. ยง 47. This section provides that 'In cases of divorce from bed and board, the court may allow the wife such alimony as her husband's circumstances will admit of, but the same shall not exceed ...


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.