Nagle v. Nagle

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Nagle v. Nagle

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

Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided July 20, 1910·No. Appeal, No. 145·Published·Cited by 2 cases

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.

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

Pincite

43 Pa. Super. 442 (Nagle v. Nagle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related