Nash v. Herbster
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION BY
HUDOCK, J.:
¶ 1 Matthew Thomas Herbster (Appellant) appeals, pro se, from the order of the trial court denying his petition to modify the amount of his child support obligation without a hearing. We vacate and remand with instructions.
¶2 The pertinent facts and procedural history may be summarized as follows.1 By order of court entered April 15, 2004, Appellant was to pay a monthly amount of support for his son, Christian. On or about October 28, 2004, Appellant filed a petition to modify this support order. In this petition, he asserted that he was entitled to a decrease because he…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bowser v. BlomSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Leasure v. LeasureSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Yerkes v. YerkesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Larson v. DivegliaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
- Fisher v. Commonwealth, Department of CorrectionsCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
3Cited by2 opinions
- Plunkard v. McConnellSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
- Nash v. HerbsterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007