Legal Opinion

Ray v. Ray

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 8, 1926No. Appeal 151PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Keller, J.,

The amount to be allowed a wife, respondent in divorce, for her support pendente lite and counsel fees is largely in the discretion of the Court of Common Pleas, subject to the condition that the allowance for support should not substantially exceed one-third of the income from the property and labor of the husband: Lynn v. Lynn, 68 Pa. Superior Ct. 324, 331. “There are no fixed rules as to the amount to be allowed. It is not to be measured solely by the wife’s necessities. The huband’s ability to pay, the separate estate of the wife, the character, situation and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. O'Malley v. O'MalleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  2. Lynn v. LynnSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
  3. Waldron v. WaldronSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1866
  4. Karmany v. KarmanySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
  5. Fernald v. FernaldSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Hanson v. HansonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  2. Walker v. WalkerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  3. Homler v. HomlerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  4. Meinel v. MeinelSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  5. Wm. Meinel v. Jennie MeinelSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1932

4 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