Commonwealth v. Trimble

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Trimble

180 A.2d 92, 197 Pa. Super. 644, 1962 Pa. Super. LEXIS 904

Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 12, 1962·No. Appeal, 18·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Opinion by

Montgomery, J.,

In this appeal from an order on appellant for the support of his family he assigns nine questions of alleged error, but only two of them were raised in the proceeding below, viz., (a) the right of his spouse to testify and (b) the sufficiency of the evidence. For the reason that they were not raised in the court below, the other seven assignments will not be considered. Sproul v. Stein, 348 Pa. 269, 35 A. 2d 61; Parke v. Pennsylvania Threshermen & Farmers Mutual Casualty Ins. Co., 334 Pa. 417, 6 A. 2d 304; Blose v. Martens, 173 Pa. Superior Ct. 122, 95 A. 2d 340.

As to the two that were raised, the first has no merit since one spouse may testify against the other in proceedings of this nature, Act of May 11, 1911, P. L. 269, §1, 19 P.S. 683; and the second is adequately covered by the opinion of the court below.

Order of the court below is affirmed on the opinion of Judge Monroe of the Court of Quarter Sessions of the Peace of Bucks County as reported in 26 Pa. D. & C. 2d 561.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion by

Montgomery, J.,

In this appeal from an order on appellant for the support of his family he assigns nine questions of alleged error, but only two of them were raised in the proceeding below, viz., (a) the right of his spouse to testify and (b) the sufficiency of the evidence. For the reason that they were not raised in the court below, the other seven assignments will not be considered. Sproul v. Stein, 348 Pa. 269, 35 A. 2d 61; Parke v. Pennsylvania Threshermen & Farmers Mutual Casualty Ins. Co., 334 Pa. 417, 6 A. 2d 304; Blose v. Martens, 173 Pa. Superior Ct. 122, 95 A. 2d 340.

As to the two that were raised, the first has no merit since one spouse may testify against the other in proceedings of this nature, Act of May 11, 1911, P. L. 269, §1, 19 P.S. 683; and the second is adequately covered by the opinion of the court below.

Order of the court below is affirmed on the opinion of Judge Monroe of the Court of Quarter Sessions of the Peace of Bucks County as reported in 26 Pa. D. & C. 2d 561.

Commonwealth v. Trimble, 180 A.2d 92, 197 Pa. Super. 644, 1962 Pa. Super. LEXIS 904 (Pa. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

180 A.2d 92 (Commonwealth v. Trimble) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related