Legal Opinion
Musko v. Musko
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided June 18, 1997No. 37 W.D.1996PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*379 OPINION OF THE COURT
FLAHERTY, Chief Justice.1
The sole question before the court is whether a valid antenuptial agreement which states that a spouse “shall not be entitled to receive any money or property or alimony or support” in the event of divorce or separation precludes the award of alimony pendente lite (APL).
Richard and Naomi Musko were married on January 5, 1991. Richard, a public accountant, owned and operated his own accounting firm in Butler, Pennsylvania. Naomi was employed as an administrative assistant in the real estate and trust department of a small Virginia bank. In…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Steuart v. McChesneySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
- Western Oil Fields, Inc. v. Pennzoil United, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970
- Minnotte AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- PBS Coal, Inc. v. Hardhat Mining, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
3Cited by11 opinions
- Trinity Industries Inc v. Greenlease Holding CoCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018
- Christina Williams v. Medley Opportunity Fund II, LPCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2020
- Com v. UPMC, Appeal of Com. by A.G.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
- Quilloin v. Tenet Healthsystem Philadelphia, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2011
- Musko v. MuskoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.