No. 1543 Philadelphia, 1981, Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division, Delaware County, No. F-29-1159 of 1978.
Allen L. Feingold, Philadelphia, for appellant.
Michael P. Dignazio, Media, for appellee.
Spaeth, Cavanaugh and Montemuro, JJ. Cavanaugh, J., concurs in the result.
[ 301 Pa. Super. Page 329]
The instant action concerns the denial by the Common Pleas Court of Delaware County of a petition for reconsideration nunc pro tunc of a support order. We affirm the lower court's decision.
This court must, in the first instance, protest the condition of the reproduced record as presented; it is not only incomplete under the Rules of Appellate Procedure but appears to contain inaccuracies as well. The lack of reciprocal filings by the appellee has further prejudiced the court's attempt to fully understand the matter presented.
A full exploration of the deficiencies of the record would be unproductive, but this court will outline a few of the more obvious problems.
Pa.R.A.P. 2152 and 2153 demand the reproduction of relevant docket entries. The suggested list of what is considered "relevant" are entries which "indicate briefly but clearly"
(1) The character of the proceedings.
(2) The pleadings or papers upon which the case was tried or heard.
(3) The trial or hearing.
(4) The order or other determination to be reviewed (under Rule 2115(a) the text of the order is to be set forth verbatim ...