Commonwealth Ex Rel. Shetzline v. Shetzline
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Keller, J.,
Appellant is engaged in the produce commission business in the City of Philadelphia, but claims that his residence and domicile are in the State of New Jersey. He was within the limits of this Commonwealth when process issued under the Act of April 13, 1867, P. L. 78, for the support of his wife and children, and was executed by Ms arrest pursuant thereto. His wife, for just cause, has left his home, taking with her their children, and has established her domicile, (Starr v. Starr, 78 Pa. Superior Ct. 579), in the City of Philadelphia, their former residence. Appellant…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Starr v. StarrSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Commonwealth v. TragleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Demott v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
- Scott v. ScottSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Commonwealth v. HawkinsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Commonwealth v. MexalSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- Commonwealth Ex Rel. Jamison v. JamisonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
- Com. of Pa. Ex Rel. Sanders v. SandersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Commonwealth Ex Rel. Bucciarelli v. BucciarelliSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
- Commonwealth ex rel. Mickey v. MickeySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.