No. 1549 October Term, 1978, Appeal from the Order of the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, Family Court Division in case #74-03914 issued on the 2nd day of May, 1978 by the Honorable Herbert Cain, Jr.
Michael D. Fioretti, Philadelphia, for appellant.
Thomas F. Goldman, Feasterville, for appellee.
Spaeth, Stranahan and Sugerman, JJ.*fn*
[ 294 Pa. Super. Page 224]
Appellant ("Father") has appealed from an order entered by the lower court, increasing the amount payable under an earlier order for the support of Father's three children. The facts necessary to our disposition are not in dispute.
In April, 1975, the parties agreed to the entry of an order directing Father to pay the sum of $65.00 weekly to Appellee ("Mother") for the support of the parties' three children.
Mother thereafter filed a petition to increase that order, and on February 23, 1977, at hearing, the lower court increased the order to the sum of $71.00 weekly, apparently temporarily, and thereupon continued the hearing at the Mother's request, in order that Father might provide his income tax returns for inspection by Mother and the court.
The continued hearing was reconvened on May 12, 1977, and thereafter, the court affirmed its earlier order increasing the first noted order from $65.00 to $71.00 weekly without further increase.*fn1
[ 294 Pa. Super. Page 225]
Apparently dissatisfied, Mother filed a petition for reconsideration with the lower court, asking the court to consider the earnings of Father's spouse,*fn2 in accordance with our decision in Commonwealth ex rel. Travitsky v. Travitsky, 230 Pa. Super. 435, 326 A.2d 883 (1974).
A hearing was held on April 11, 1978 upon Mother's petition for reconsideration and subsequent to the hearing, the court increased its earlier order for support of the children from $71.00 to $77.00 per week.
On appeal Father advances two contentions. He first argues that the lower court erred in refusing to consider the income of Mother's second spouse and the sum he was contributing to the support of the children. Father also contends that regardless of whether the lower court considered the income of Mother's second spouse and the extent to which it was used to support the children, the ...