Legal Opinion

Smith v. Smith

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lebanon County

Decided December 19, 2014No. 2013-20491Published

1Opinion of the Court

CHARLES, J.,

1. Alimony pendente lite began as a precept of Pennsylvania Common Law, not then discharged his lawyer and filed a as a matter of right. It was addressed to the sound discretion of the court, and the court could refuse it where cause against it was shown. The controlling element in granting an allowance was the wife’s necessity for it, the husband’s ability to pay and all the circumstances of the particular case. The destitute condition of the wife was a necessary prerequisite to an order for alimony pendent lite. Her want of pecuniary *535ability had to be shown affirmatively before…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Remick v. RemickSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Hanson v. HansonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  3. McNulty v. McNultySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  4. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Lipschultz v. LipschultzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  5. Belsky v. BelskySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1961

8 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