Appeal from order of Court of Common Pleas No. 2 of Philadelphia County, June T., 1964, No. 4133, in case of George Carroll Bennett v. Mildred Rosalind Bennett.
William H. Seyfert, with him Raspin, Espenshade, Heins, Erskine & Stewart, for appellant.
Homer Cook Grasberger, for appellee.
Ervin, P. J., Wright, Watkins, Montgomery, Jacobs, and Spaulding, JJ. (Hoffman, J., absent). Opinion by Ervin, P. J.
[ 211 Pa. Super. Page 154]
The question involved in this appeal is whether the husband-plaintiff should be required to pay an additional counsel fee of $1,000.00.
The court below refused a divorce a.v.m. to the plaintiff-husband and also refused a divorce a. m. e. t. to the defendant-wife. The court below ordered the plaintiff-husband to pay the sum of $1,000.00 as additional counsel fee to the wife's attorney.
Relevant facts are established by the petition and answer containing new matter and are as follows: The husband's gross annual income is $5,952.18. Out of this he pays a support order for the wife of $28.00 a week, amounting to $1,456.00 a year, and has a net income of $4,496.18. He is an employe of a bank. The wife is a legal secretary and has a gross annual income of $3,900.00. If the support order of $1,456.00 is added to her annual income, she has a gross annual income of $5,356.00.
The parties sold a home owned as tenants by the entireties and the wife received the sum of $3,949.58, one-half of the proceeds of this sale, outright, and the other half of the proceeds, to wit: $3,949.57, was deposited in a joint savings account with the right of survivorship. The signature of both parties is required for any withdrawals from the savings account. The passbook is in the wife's possession and no withdrawals have been made from this account.
The husband owns no real or personal property except his personal effects, a 1963 automobile and a checking account with a balance of less than $250.00. He has no income other than the salary from the bank.
The husband has paid $75.00 on account of defendant's counsel fee, as per decree of the court below dated September 24, 1964. He has also paid the official court stenographer for the notes of testimony, which included
[ 211 Pa. Super. Page 155]
an additional copy for defendant's attorney, at ...