Markley v. Markley

• Citation: 218 A.2d 84,207 Pa.Super. 294
• Parties: Sidney M. MARKLEY v. Rosalie S. MARKLEY, Appellant.
• Decision Date: 24 March 1966
• Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Page 84

218 A.2d 84

207 Pa.Super. 294

Sidney M. MARKLEY v. Rosalie S. MARKLEY, Appellant.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

March 24, 1966.

Rehearing Denied April 15, 1966.

George A. D'Angelo, Philadelphia, for appellant.

Michael Kivko, Robert McK. Glass, Sunbury, For appellee.

Before ERVIN, P.J., and WRIGHT, WATKINS, MONTGOMERY, JACOBS and HOFFMAN, JJ.

WRIGHT, Judge.

On June 25, 1962, in the Court of Common Pleas of Northumberland County, Sidney M. Markley filed a complaint against his wife under the provisions of The Divorce Law of May 2, 1929, P.L. 1237, as enlarged by the amendment of December 30, 1959, P.L. 2055, 23 P.S. § 15. This complaint contained three counts. The first count was an action in divorce a.v.m. on the ground of indignities to the person. The second count was an action for rights of visitation with and custody of Lisa Markley, the minor daughter of the parties, born February 9, 1954. The third count was an action to set the amount of alimony, maintenance and counsel fees. The eventual disposition by the lower of the first count forms the basis of a companion appeal. See Markley v. Markley, Pa.Superior Ct. The second count was disposed of by an order of the lower court dated April 22, 1963, from which order ¹ no appeal was taken. As to the third count, an opinion was filed in the lower court on August 5, 1963, allowing interim counsel fees, temporarily refusing alimony, costs and expenses, and making an order for the wife's maintenance in the sum of $125.00 per week, and for the daughter's maintenance in the sum of $35.00 per week.

We are here concerned with an appeal by the wife from the order of August 5, 1963, involving the third count, in which appellant's only contention is that 'the amount of support' is inadequate. We have made a painstaking review of the voluminous original record in this and the companion appeal. The case has been bitterly contested. The docket entries alone cover eight typewritten pages. The notes of testimony are contained in ten folio volumes, totaling over twenty-two hundred pages. An effort will be made to limit this opinion to the sole issue before us in the instant appeal. The factual situation, so far as here pertinent, appears in the following excerpt from the opinion below:

'The relevant facts for the determination of the questions herein presented disclose the following history. The plaintiff, Sidney M. Markley, and the defendant, Rosalie S. Markley, were married November 23, 1949 and subsequent thereto resided in New York City for a period of about five years. On February 9, 1954 a daughter, Lisa, was born to this marriage. In the latter part of 1954 the parties moved to Rye, New York, where they remained for about six years. In March 1961 they moved to Yardley, Bucks County, Pennsylvania, where they separated either in late June or early July, 1961, when the plaintiff packed his belongings and left their home. The plaintiff resides in Sunbury in this County, and the defendant and the minor child reside in Yardley. The plaintiff is presently 56 years of age, engaged in the motion picture business, is President of A.C.E. Films, Inc., who employ him under a written contract by the terms of which he is paid $1250.00 per week. He has an additional income of $4,000.00 per year. This contract with the film company began March 12, 1962 and is for a period of five years duration. His net income is between $25,000.00 and $30,000.00 per year, and his net worth between $125,000.00 and $135,000.00. He provides a home for his wife and child in Yardley titled in his own name, which he purchased at a cost of about $26,000.00. The home is mortgaged and he pays the sum of $177.00 per month on account of the mortgage, which includes taxes and insurance. The separate estate of the defendant consists of U.S. Saving Bonds of the value of $700.00 at maturity, and dividends from stock in the amount of $165.00 annually'.

The applicable legal principles are well...