Frame v. Frame
974 A.2d 1160, 601 Pa. 476, 2009 Pa. LEXIS 1156
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Frame v. Frame. Read the opinion of the Court — 974 A.2d 1160 →
Opinion
[477]*477 ORDER
AND NOW, this 23rd day of June 2009, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, the order of the Superior Court is VACATED, and the order of the trial court is REINSTATED. See Humphreys v. DeRoss, 567 Pa. 614, 790 A.2d 281 (2002) (Section 4302 of the Domestic Relations Code does not include “gifts” in definition of income; a party’s assets may, however, be relevant in determination of an upward deviation from the Support Guidelines); accord Jacobs v. Jacobs, 884 A.2d 301 (Pa.Super.2005); Pa.R.C.P.1910.16-5.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Frame v. Frame, 974 A.2d 1160, 601 Pa. 476, 2009 Pa. LEXIS 1156 (Pa. 2009).
974 A.2d 1160 (Frame v. Frame) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Jacobs v. Jacobs
884 A.2d 301 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2005)
Humphreys v. DeRoss
790 A.2d 281 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2002)