No. 823, Pittsburgh, 1980, Appeal from the Order Dated July 24, 1980 of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, Family Division at No. 879 of 1979.
Edward Weingart, Pittsburgh, for appellant.
Joseph M. Wymard, Pittsburgh, for appellee.
Cavanaugh, Johnson and Shertz, JJ. Decision was rendered prior to Shertz, J., leaving the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
[ 294 Pa. Super. Page 192]
This appeal by Donald Overs is from an Order of support, for Appellee wife and a minor daughter, in the amount of seven hundred thirty dollars per month. Appellant raises four arguments on appeal:*fn1 first, that the evidence does not support a finding that Appellee had adequate reason in law to leave the marital domicile and she is not, therefore, entitled to support; second, that Appellant should have been granted a continuance because he was unrepresented at the
[ 294 Pa. Super. Page 193]
hearing held in this matter and he was unfairly precluded from presenting his case; third, that the court erred in determining Appellee's income; and fourth, that the court erred in calculating the support order by taking into account prior indebtedness. Finding no merit to these contentions, we affirm the Order of the lower court.*fn2
Donald and Irene Overs separated in May, 1980, when Mrs. Overs, along with the couple's sixteen-year-old daughter,*fn3 left the marital domicile. Appellant claims the record does not support a finding that Appellee established entitlement to support inasmuch as Appellee failed to show that her voluntary withdrawal from the family home was legally justified.
In an action for support where the wife has voluntarily withdrawn from the common abode, without the consent of the husband, the law is well settled.
In such an instance, it is not necessary for the wife to present grounds for leaving her husband which would entitle her to divorce in order to procure an order of support . . . . The wife need only show by sufficient evidence a reasonable cause that would justify her voluntary withdrawal from the common domicile.
Commonwealth ex rel. Loosley v. Loosley, 236 Pa. Super. 389, 391, 345 A.2d 721, 722 (1975) (quoting Halderman v. Halderman, 230 Pa. Super. 125, 326 A.2d 908 (1974)). See also Larkin v. ...