Murray v. Murray
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 42, March T., 1922, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Luzerne Co., July T., 1921, No. 228, discharging rule to show cause why defendant should not pay alimony pendente lite and counsel fees in the case of Mary R. Murray v. Michael J. Murray. Rule for alimony and counsel fees pendente lite. Before Woodward, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. The court discharged the rule. Plaintiff appealed. Error assigned was the order of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Keller, J.,
Appellant filed a libel in divorce a vinculo matrimonii on the ground of desertion under the provisions of the Acts of March 13,1815, 6 Sm. L. 286, and June 20,1893, P. L. 471. She appeals from the order of the court refusing to allow her counsel fees and alimony pendente lite.
Without passing on the merits of the case, we are of opinion that her appeal is premature. Section 13 of the Act of 1815, supra, provides: “Either of the parties in any suit or action now depending, or that shall hereafter be brought under this act, after the final sentence or decree given, may…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Neagley v. NeagleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Lynn v. LynnSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
- Appeal of PowersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
- Waldron v. WaldronSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1866
- Biddle v. BiddleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Rutherford v. RutherfordSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
- Clark v. ClarkSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
- Hanson v. HansonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
- Gould v. GouldSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Boerio v. BoerioSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.