Appeals from orders of Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County, May T., 1971, No. F-17-127, in case of Commonwealth ex rel. Phoebe L. Welsh v. D. Patrick Welsh.
Alexander A. DiSanti, with him Richard, DiSanti & Hamilton, for appellant.
Ralph B. D'Iorio, with him Robert B. Surrick and Cramp, D'Iorio, McConchie and Surrick, for appellee.
Wright, P. J., Watkins, Jacobs, Hoffman, Spaulding, Cercone, and Packel, JJ. Wright, P. J., would affirm on the opinion of Judge Bloom.
[ 222 Pa. Super. Page 586]
Appellant has appealed from two lower court orders denying his petitions for reduction of a support order. The basis of each petition is that two minor children have attained majority and are capable of being self-sufficient.
On May 7, 1971, an Order was entered by the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County requiring appellant to pay support for appellee and the parties' five children in the amount of $12,000 annually -- $3,000 being allocated to wife-appellee and $9,000 to the five children. In addition, appellant was ordered to pay the real estate taxes, fire insurance, and all household repairs on a jointly-owned residential property occupied by appellee; and, all medical, dental and drug bills incurred by wife-appellee and the children.
After an unsuccessful appeal of that Order to this Court [220 Pa. Superior Ct. 725, 283 A.2d 80 (1971) (Per Curiam)], appellant filed a petition to modify the Order. A hearing disclosed that the parties' nineteen-year old daughter had left home and become emancipated. The Court, thereupon, reduced the Order to provide for $3,000 support for wife-appellee and $7,200 for the remaining four children.
On April 3, 1972, appellant filed another petition to modify the revised Order, based upon the fact that on November 18, 1971 another child, Douglas had celebrated his twenty-first birthday. After a hearing on April
[ 222 Pa. Super. Page 5877]
, 1972, at which it was stipulated that Douglas had attained his majority, the Court dismissed appellant's petition. Although the Court eliminated Douglas from the support order, it retained the $10,200 order for appellee and the remaining three children.
Thereafter, on June 6, 1972, appellant presented a further petition to modify the Order, based on the fact that another child, David, had attained his eighteenth birthday, was graduating from high school, and was engaged in employment for the Wawa Food Markets. The Court refused appellant's petition, and denied appellant a hearing on the merits.
The instant case is before us on two separate appeals, one from the Order of May 9, 1972, denying a reduction of the support order despite the attainment of majority of one son, Douglas; and, one from the Order of June 7, 1972, refusing to hear testimony on appellant's ...