Nagle v. Nagle

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Nagle v. Nagle

43 Pa. Super. 442, 1910 Pa. Super. LEXIS 70

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJuly 20, 1910

DocketAppeal, No. 145

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 43 Pa. Super. 442 (Nagle v. Nagle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Nagle v. Nagle, 43 Pa. Super. 442, 1910 Pa. Super. LEXIS 70 (Pa. Ct. App. 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The facts of this case are clearly set forth in the opinion of the learned judge of the common pleas, and need not be restated by us. We have carefully examined the evidence and are all of opinion that his conclusions of fact are sustained thereby. It follows that the refusal to set aside the decree of divorce was not error.

The order discharging the rule to show cause why the decree of divorce made in the above case on August 2, 1897, should not be vacated and set aside, is affirmed at the costs of the appellant.

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

Per Curiam,

The facts of this case are clearly set forth in the opinion of the learned judge of the common pleas, and need not be restated by us. We have carefully examined the evidence and are all of opinion that his conclusions of fact are sustained thereby. It follows that the refusal to set aside the decree of divorce was not error.

The order discharging the rule to show cause why the decree of divorce made in the above case on August 2, 1897, should not be vacated and set aside, is affirmed at the costs of the appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

43 Pa. Super. 442, 1910 Pa. Super. LEXIS 70, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nagle-v-nagle-pasuperct-1910.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack