Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Fascione v. Fascione

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 7, 1979No. 1462 and 1576Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSpaeth, Judge

For the reasons stated in the majority opinion, I agree that the wife is entitled to a partition of all realty and personalty owned by the parties as tenants by the entireties. I also agree that the husband is not entitled to reimbursement from the wife for his partial discharge of her 1976 income tax liability, but as to this, my reasons are different from the majority’s. The husband testified at trial that he

tried very hard to do two things. One thing was to get [my wife] to acknowledge her [tax] liability and to make funds available to meet that obligation. The other thing I tried to do…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. DiFlorido v. DiFloridoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  2. Butler v. ButlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  3. Lindenfelser v. LindenfelserSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  4. Reifschneider v. ReifschneiderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  5. Peoples Savings & Dime Bank & Trust Co. v. ScottSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API