385 Pa. Super. 126 - Rock v. Rock’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In Commonwealth ex rel. Loosley v. Loosley, 236 Pa.Super. 389 , 345 A.2d 721 (1975), we held that where the testimony-established that the husband knew the wife was being treated for a psychiatric disorder, yet persisted in sleeping in a separate bedroom, even though this made her nervous, and also exchanged bitter words with her and told her on numerous occasions that he wanted a divorce, the wife had reasonable cause to leave. In Commonwealth ex rel. Ross v. Ross, 206 Pa.Super. 429 , 213 A.2d 135 (1965), a support order was upheld where the wife testified that she left her husband because he would curse her and argue with her incessantly, and that if she tried to escape him by sleeping in their second bedroom, he would follow her, pull the pillows and blankets from her, and try to drag her out of bed. In Commonwealth ex rel. Keeth v. Keeth, 223 Pa.Super. 96 , 289 A.2d 732 (1972), we held that where the husband was away from home an entire weekend, and the wife found him in his car with another woman, and the husband slapped the wife after she slapped the woman, the wife was entitled to support from her husband after he permanently moved out of their common abode. In Commonwealth ex rel. Lebowitz v. Lebowitz, 227 Pa.Super. 593 , 307 A.2d 442 (1973), a wife was held to have adequate legal cause for leaving her husband when he refused to allow her to be a practicing Jehovah’s Witness in their house.... On the other hand, we have denied petitions for support where the wife left”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 435 Pa. Super. 103 - McKolanis v. McKolanis

2. “This Court may reverse a support order only if it finds that the order cannot be sustained on any valid ground. Shovlin v. Shovlin, 318 Pa.Super. 516 , 465 A.2d 673 (1983) . As such, absent an abuse of discretion or [insufficient evidence to sustain the support order, this Court will not interfere with the broad discretion afforded the trial court. Boni v. Boni, 302 Pa.Super. 102 , 448 A.2d 547 (1982). Further, the assessment of the credibility of witnesses is within the sole province of the trial court. Kembel v. Schlegel, 329 Pa.Super. 159 , 478 A.2d 11 (1984) .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 405 Pa. Super. 290 - Myers v. Myers