Legal Opinion

Bowser v. Blom

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 25, 2002PublishedCited by 82 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Justice CASTILLE.

This Court granted allowance of appeal in this domestic relations/support matter limited to a question of first impression: the proper interpretation of the counsel fee provision governing support proceedings under the Domestic Relations Code, i.e., 23 Pa.C.S. § 4351. For the reasons that follow, we hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in declining to assess counsel fees against appellee in this case pursuant to § 4351(a) and, accordingly, we affirm. In so holding, we take the opportunity to address the appropriate factors for a trial…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Housing Authority of Chester v. Pennsylvania State Civil Service CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  2. Costello v. LeNoirSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  3. Women's Homoeopathic Hospital of Philadelphia CaseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
  4. Commonwealth v. BurnsworthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  5. Sphere Drake Insurance v. Philadelphia Gas WorksSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001

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

3Cited by82 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. Gilmour Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  2. Hannaberry HVAC v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  3. Walker v. ElebySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
  4. Commonwealth v. DicksonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  5. Martin v. DOT, Bureau of Driver LicensingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006

77 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