Legal Opinion

Steadman v. Turner

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 3, 1986No. 1560PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CERCONE, Judge:

This appeal, in an action for divorce, is taken from the decree of the court that a valid marriage did not exist between the parties. Appellant contends that a valid common law marriage existed between the parties thereby entitling her to equitable distribution of marital assets under the Pennsylvania Divorce Code 1 (“Divorce Code”) in an action for divorce or, in the alternative, under the principles of annulment of marriage. We agree with the court below that a marriage did not exist and that appellant is not entitled to the relief requested.

The scope of review to be applied…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Pierce v. PierceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
  2. Wagner EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
  3. Buradus v. General Cement Products Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
  4. In Re Estate of GargesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  5. Commonwealth v. SullivanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Canute v. CanuteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  2. Collier v. City of MilfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
  3. Commonwealth v. 6066 Buckingham Drive, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Bucks County1989
  4. In re Estate of CoraceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  5. Johns v. Johns, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Luzerne County1992

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

Powered by the Exa API