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.

BAIO v. BAIO (09/12/61)

September 12, 1961

BAIO
v.
BAIO, APPELLANT.



Appeal, No. 195, Oct. T., 1961, from decree of Court of Common Pleas No. 4 of Philadelphia County, Sept. T., 1957, No. 1558, in case of Salvatore Aldo Baio v. Marian Theresa DiOrio Baio. Decree affirmed; reargument refused October 4, 1961.

COUNSEL

George A. D'Angelo, for appellant.

G. Fred DiBona, for appellee.

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

Author: Watkins

[ 196 Pa. Super. Page 203]

OPINION BY WATKINS, J.

This is an appeal from the decree of the Court of Common Pleas No. 4 of Philadelphia County granting a divorce in favor of Salvatore Aldo Baio, the husband-appellee, and against Marian Theresa DiOrio Baio, the wife-appellant, because of indignities to the person. The parties were married on July 7, 1946, at St. Thomas Aquinas Church in Philadelphia; and at the time of the hearing they were each 35 years of age. There were no children born of this marriage.

Beginning about two years after the wedding, this was a most unhappy marriage. The trouble seemed to lie in the unbridled jealousy of the wife. The record is replete with incidents and quarrels; reproach and vulgar and profane abuse; all growing out of continuous charges of infidelity. This course of conduct was intermittent from November 1947 and became a daily occurrence from 1957 up to the final separation.

The parties first separated on October 17, 1957, and this action was commenced by the husband on October 22, 1957. A reconciliation was effected by Father Simon of St. Thomas Aquinas Church, and the parties

[ 196 Pa. Super. Page 204]

    agreed to "start things all over again, forgetting the past arguments and think about the future."

Within three weeks of this reconciliation the wife's course of conduct was renewed and they again separated on March 8, 1958. Again there was a reconciliation on March 10, 1958 and again the same trouble was repeated so that the husband left finally on June 12, 1958.

As we said in Henszey v. Henszey, 195 Pa. Superior Ct. 377, 171 A.2d 837 (1961), at page 379, "This Court on appeal must consider the evidence do novo, pass on its weight and on the credibility of the witnesses and reach an independent conclusion upon the merits. Rankin v. Rankin, 181 Pa. Superior Ct. 414, 124 A.2d 639 (1956)." However, the judgment of the master, as to credibility, who has had the opportunity to see and hear the witnesses, is entitled to the fullest consideration and after a careful review of this record we are, as the ...


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.