Dukmen v. Dukmen
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1DissentSpaeth, Judge
In order to obtain a divorce under the Divorce Law, Act of May 2, 1929, P.L. 1237, 23 P.S. § 10, on the ground that his wife committed indignities to his person, appellee had to prove that he was an innocent and injured spouse. E. g. Mintz v. Mintz, 258 Pa.Super. 187, 392 A.2d 747 (1978). Appellee’s own testimony establishes that he was not innocent and injured. Appellee testified that he has not tried to speak with his wife for years; has not sought sexual relations with his wife since 1959; has not asked his wife to go out for a social activity since 1959; has started as many arguments with…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Rankin v. RankinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- Shoemaker v. ShoemakerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
- Fodor v. FodorSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
- Nichols v. NicholsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
- Mintz v. MintzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.