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. DE CRISTOFANO v. DE CRISTOFANO (11/16/60)

November 16, 1960

COMMONWEALTH EX REL. DE CRISTOFANO
v.
DE CRISTOFANO, APPELLANT.



Appeal, No. 322, Oct. T., 1960, from order of Municipal Court, Domestic Relations Division, May T., 1960, No. 2386, in case of Commonwealth ex rel. De Cristofano v. De Cristofano. Order affirmed.

COUNSEL

Frank Carano, with him Lionel Savadove, and Carano and Kunken, for appellant.

David B. Winshel, for appellee.

Before Gunther, Wright, Woodside, Ervin, Watkins, and Montgomery, JJ. (rhodes, P.j., absent).

Author: Montgomery

[ 193 Pa. Super. Page 575]

OPINION BY MONTGOMERY, J.

This is a proceeding for maintenance and support brought by the defendant's wife for her own behalf and in behalf of a minor child.

The case first was heard before Judge STOUT, wherein a temporary order was entered in the sum of $35.00 per week with a direction that both parties appear for psychiatric examination and the case was continued.

The case was then heard before Judge SCHWARTZ, wherein an order was entered upon the defendant to pay $25.00 a week for the support of his wife and $15.00 a week for the minor child. The defendant has appealed from this order.

The parties were married April 4, 1959, and lived together until February 13, 1960. There had been a prior separation for a brief period commencing on December 25, 1959, but there is little testimony on this point in either hearing, and a reconciliation had been effected in a few days.

The court below found that the separation on February 13 was caused by an argument between the parties arising over an impending visit of the wife's sister and during which the defendant became angry, struck his wife, and also threatened to "murder or cripple" her. She became hysterical and required treatment by a doctor. The wife, although employed, was in an advanced state of pregnancy at the time and she almost suffered a miscarriage because of this treatment. The court further found that the defendant had mistreated her and threatened her on a number of other occasions prior to the separation. She returned to her father's house where she now resides; and she testified that she is afraid to return to live with her husband. The evidence

[ 193 Pa. Super. Page 576]

    also indicates that after the separation he did not contact his wife again before the child was born on June 13, 1960, and in fact ordered her father to ...


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.