Appeal from order of Court of Common Pleas, Family Court Division, of Philadelphia, March T., 1970, No. 1070, in case of Commonwealth ex rel. Ruth Paul v. Louis Paul.
Oscar Spivack and Spivack & Dranoff, for appellant.
Joseph Ominsky, for appellee.
Wright, P. J., Watkins, Jacobs, Hoffman, Spaulding, Cercone, and Packel, JJ. Concurring Opinion by Hoffman, J. Spaulding and Packel, JJ., join in this concurring opinion.
[ 222 Pa. Super. Page 519]
Concurring Opinion by Hoffman, J.:
This appeal involves the question of whether a court may deny a hearing on a petition to reduce an order of support where the petitioner is in arrears of the support order. The lower court and the majority of this Court have answered this question in the affirmative. I concur in the result reached by the majority. I must, however, add these remarks to emphasize my disapproval of the existing case law of this Commonwealth, which we are bound to follow, but which I believe is contrary to emerging trends and against public policy.
Appellant, Louis Paul, and appellee, Ruth Paul, were married on January 21, 1949, and are the parents
[ 222 Pa. Super. Page 520]
of two children. On April 6, 1970, a temporary award of support was entered by agreement in the amount of $125 per week for the wife and children. After a period of time, appellant stopped payments of support, and permitted the accumulation of arrearages to the extent of $5,000. On June 21, 1971, the Court increased the original order to $150 per week. Having determined that appellant's default of payment was in no way caused by an inability to pay, the Court further denied ...