Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Goldstein v. Goldstein

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 18, 1986No. 02250Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWieand, Judge

The majority holds that a pending action in equity to partition property owned by husband and wife as tenants by the entireties is not superseded or preempted by a subsequent action in divorce brought by one of the spouses and containing a request for equitable distribution of marital property. For reasons hereinafter appearing, I agree with the majority’s holding. However, I disagree with the majority’s further conclusion that after entireties property has been partitioned between the spouses, it loses its status as “marital property” and is no longer subject to equitable distribution under…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Shapiro v. ShapiroSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  2. Berhalter v. BerhalterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  3. Maxwell v. SaylorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  4. Gallagher EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  5. Platek v. PlatekSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API