Case ID: pa-super_224/html/0460-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam, Spaulding, J.:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Murphy v. Murphy, Appellant.
    April 12, 1973:
    
      Joseph J. Murphy, for appellant.
    
      Arthur R. Littleton, with him Frances Woerner, and Morgan, Lewis & Boehius, for appellee.
   Opinion

Per Curiam,

Order affirmed.

Dissenting Opinion by

Spaulding, J.:

I respectfully dissent.

Appellant challenges the constitutionality of the Act of May 2,1929, P. L. 1237, §46, as amended, 23 P.S. §46, which allows for the payment of alimony pendente lite, counsel fees and costs to wives, but not to husbands. I believe the statute to be unconstitutional for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in Senderson v. Henderson, 224 Pa. Superior Ct. 182, 303 A. 2d 843 (1973). I would therefore reverse the order of the court below.

Hoffman, J., joins in this dissenting opinion.