Prall, L. v. Prall, L.

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedMay 21, 2025
Docket1272 WDA 2024
StatusUnpublished

This text of Prall, L. v. Prall, L. (Prall, L. v. Prall, L.) 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
Prall, L. v. Prall, L., (Pa. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

J-S15004-25

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37

LUCINDA PRALL : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA Appellant : : : v. : : : LARRY PRALL : No. 1272 WDA 2024

Appeal from the Order Entered September 18, 2024 In the Court of Common Pleas of Potter County Civil Division at No(s): No. 3259 of 2021

BEFORE: OLSON, J., SULLIVAN, J., and FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E.*

MEMORANDUM BY OLSON, J.: FILED: May 21, 2025

Appellant, Lucinda Prall (“Wife”) appeals from the trial court’s

September 18, 2024 order, which resolved the equitable distribution claims

between Wife and Larry Prall (“Husband”), awarded Wife alimony, and denied

Wife’s claims for counsel fees.1 We affirm.

The trial court ably summarized the underlying facts and procedural

history of this case:

This matter comes before the Court on the [Wife’s] Complaint for Divorce, Equitable Distribution, Alimony and Counsel

____________________________________________

* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.

1 This order was made final by the trial court’s September 18, 2024 entry of

a final decree in divorce. See Trial Court Decree, 9/18/24, at 1; see also Wilson v. Wilson, 828 A.2d 376, 378 (Pa. Super. 2003) (“a pre-divorce decree distributing marital property is interlocutory. . . . It cannot be reviewed until it has been rendered final by the entry of a decree in divorce”). J-S15004-25

Fees. At the time of the hearing, [Wife] was 59 years of age and resided in Punta Gorda, Florida. [Husband] is 73 years of age and lives with his daughter in Fairfield, Pennsylvania. The parties were married on August 2, 1986 and separated on April 23, 2021. Both parties had previously been married, this being their second marriage. [Wife] has an adult daughter from a previous relationship, whom Husband adopted, and the Husband has two other adult daughters from a previous relationship. They have no children together.

Wife's education and training includes being a licensed cosmetologist, an LPN and medical transcriptionist. Wife was employed with Giant Food Markets, which ended when she suffered an injury. She received a worker's compensation settlement from Giant in June 1998 in the amount of $47,500. Presently Wife's income consists of social security disability benefits of $1,125 a month but must purchase the Medicare benefit at $174.76 per month. Wife's net income is approximately $950 per month.

Wife received an inheritance from her mother's estate of $25,000 which was placed in an Edward Jones investment account on or about December 31, 2016. See Defendant's Exhibit 41. In the Edward Jones statement dated September 20, 2021 through October 29, 2021 the account value was $28,140. Wife claims that she has expended all of Edward Jones funds at this time; however, Wife presented no evidence indicating that the account has been depleted.

Wife has a myriad of medical issues, which are listed on Plaintiffs Exhibit A and avers that she is presently unable to work. Wife testified that she has unpaid medical bills in the amount of $7,578. She reports she is on numerous medications some of which are not covered by any insurance. Wife has had three back surgeries. Wife has Medicare parts A and B which she pays $174.76 per month.

Husband was employed with Tyco Electronics from December of 1968 through retirement in January of 1999 where he earned a pension. Thirteen years of his pension is deemed marital. Husband's monthly retirement benefit is $599.91. At the time of his retirement, Husband made an election to provide his Wife with a 100% irrevocable survivor benefit which would provide her with the same benefit of $599.91

-2- J-S15004-25

upon his passing. This election meant that Husband received a reduced monthly benefit than if had made an election to give his Wife less than the 100% survivor benefit. According to QDRO GROUP evaluation contained in Defendant's Exhibit 34, and the testimony of the pension appraiser Lance Melin, the marital portion of the retirement benefit was valued at $29,061.96 with Wife's portion of her survivor benefit valued at $18,906.61. If Wife receives 50% of the marital portion of the retirement benefit without any offset of her survivorship benefit, she will receive $128.80 per month of Husband's monthly benefit of $599.91. Husband incurred expert fees in the amount of $1,700 in having the pension evaluation prepared and the expert Lance Melin testify.

Husband also receives social security benefits in the amount of $2,681.90 per month. Deducted from that benefit is the sum of $164.90 for Medicare insurance. He also pays approximately $270.00 for supplemental insurance and $41.00 for Part B benefit. Accordingly, after payment of Medicare and supplemental insurance Husband's net social security benefit is $2,206.00.

Husband takes ten medications as he has had health issues including a stroke in 2012 and is under the care of a vascular surgeon. He has one carotid artery.

The current spousal support order for Wife is dated October 18, 2023. In that Order Husband's Social Security and retirement were used in establishing the spousal support amount. The Order provided that spousal support should be $624.81[; however, this] was reduced to $306.55 with the understanding that Husband was paying marital obligations while Wife was residing in the camper. . . .

The parties own a marital residence in Potter County and a seasonal residence in Florida. The Florida residence is a camper which was purchased on October 22, 2020 for $71,213. Wife contributed $ 10,000 from her inheritance money and the parties borrowed $66,247 from the Bank of the West with a monthly payment of $ 516.52. See Defendant's Exhibit G. Wife claims that Husband agreed to repay her the $10,000 she contributed to the purchase. The parties would spend the winters in the camper from October through March and the rest of the year at their residence in

-3- J-S15004-25

Potter County. Wife testified that after the parties separated that she paid the lot rent and insurance on the camper for three years. Wife has had exclusive possession of the camper since the date of separation of April 23, 2021 while Husband continued to make the loan payment on the camper. Husband testified that Wife paid the lot rent for 2022 and 2023 and that he paid the insurance on the camper since July 2022.

The parties had attempted to sell the camper and as of the date of the opinion in this matter have an offer for $56,000, which is less than the payoff. By stipulation and Order of Court dated May 7, 2024, they had agreed to sell the camper for $57,000 and use some of the proceeds from the sale of the marital residence to pay any deficiency. As of March 1, 2024, the parties owed $60,831 to Bank of the West for the camper. See [Plaintiff’s Exhibit H]. Previously, Husband had attempted to sell the camper and incurred advertising fees of $220. Husband continues to pay the loan on the camper until it is sold.

Wife claims that she vacated the camper on January 5, 2024[,] but still resides in the camper park with another individual without any expense or fee to her. Defendant's Exhibits 1 and 2 are photographs taken after January 5, 2024 and show the interior of the camper filled with personal property. When questioned whether she lives with Charles Walter, she testified that she never stays overnight with him and sleeps at another undisclosed location.

The parties owned a marital residence at 27 Watson Farm Road, Austin, Pennsylvania, which was sold on January 29, 2024.

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

Related

Isralsky v. Isralsky
824 A.2d 1178 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2003)
Wilson v. Wilson
828 A.2d 376 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Prall, L. v. Prall, L., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prall-l-v-prall-l-pasuperct-2025.