Gerber v. Gerber

Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas

Gerber v. Gerber

16 Pa. D. & C. 224, 1930 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 34

CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lehigh County

DecidedOctober 13, 1930

DocketNo. 198

StatusPublished

This text of 16 Pa. D. & C. 224 (Gerber v. Gerber) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lehigh County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gerber v. Gerber, 16 Pa. D. & C. 224, 1930 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 34 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Iobst, J.,

The respondent, Harold P. Gerber, when the subpoena in divorce was issued in this case, was in the Lehigh County Prison under sentence imposed by the Court of Quarter Sessions of Lehigh County and service of the subpoena upon him was impossible without the aid of the court. Even though the respondent is in custodia legis, he has a right to appear at the hearing and be heard in his defense if he so desires. However, in view of the evident poverty of the libellant, we will enter the following order: That the master proceed to another hearing and give notice to Harold F. Gerber of the day of the hearing, with notice to him of his right to apply to this court for a writ of habeas corpus, to the end that he may be brought before the master to testify if he so desires, and to subpoena witnesses in his behalf; this notice to be served on the respondent in the same manner as the subpoena was served. Case recommitted to the master.

From Edwin L. Kohler, Allentown, Pa.

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

Iobst, J.,

The respondent, Harold P. Gerber, when the subpoena in divorce was issued in this case, was in the Lehigh County Prison under sentence imposed by the Court of Quarter Sessions of Lehigh County and service of the subpoena upon him was impossible without the aid of the court. Even though the respondent is in custodia legis, he has a right to appear at the hearing and be heard in his defense if he so desires. However, in view of the evident poverty of the libellant, we will enter the following order: That the master proceed to another hearing and give notice to Harold F. Gerber of the day of the hearing, with notice to him of his right to apply to this court for a writ of habeas corpus, to the end that he may be brought before the master to testify if he so desires, and to subpoena witnesses in his behalf; this notice to be served on the respondent in the same manner as the subpoena was served. Case recommitted to the master.

From Edwin L. Kohler, Allentown, Pa.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 Pa. D. & C. 224, 1930 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 34, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gerber-v-gerber-pactcompllehigh-1930.