Rix v. Rix

Schuylkill County Court of Common Pleas

Rix v. Rix

11 Pa. D. & C. 234, 1928 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 53

CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Schuylkill County

DecidedJuly 23, 1928

DocketNo. 338

StatusPublished

This text of 11 Pa. D. & C. 234 (Rix v. Rix) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Schuylkill County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rix v. Rix, 11 Pa. D. & C. 234, 1928 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 53 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Houck, J.,

The ground of divorce alleged in the libel is adultery. The master has made fourteen findings of fact, but he has made no specific finding of fact respecting the establishment of the cause of divorce which is alleged in the libel. This is an absolute prerequisite to our consideration of his report: Dean v. Dean, 14 Schuyl. Legal Rec. 82; Hinks v. Hinks, 17 Schuyl. Legal Rec. 104. The master in his fourth conclusion of law states as follows: “ (4) The facts as produced constitute a clear inference as to the crime of adultery and are sufficient to entitle libellant to a divorce under the provisions of the Act of March 13, 1815, § 1, 6 Sm. Laws, 286.” Before this conclusion can be sustained, it is necessary for the master to make a finding of fact, definite and particularized, relative to the commission of the crime of adultery. It follows that this case must be remanded to the master.

This case is remanded to the master for such further action as he may deem proper, not inconsistent with the views expressed in this opinion.

Prom M. M. Burke, Shenandoah, Pa.

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

Houck, J.,

The ground of divorce alleged in the libel is adultery. The master has made fourteen findings of fact, but he has made no specific finding of fact respecting the establishment of the cause of divorce which is alleged in the libel. This is an absolute prerequisite to our consideration of his report: Dean v. Dean, 14 Schuyl. Legal Rec. 82; Hinks v. Hinks, 17 Schuyl. Legal Rec. 104. The master in his fourth conclusion of law states as follows: “ (4) The facts as produced constitute a clear inference as to the crime of adultery and are sufficient to entitle libellant to a divorce under the provisions of the Act of March 13, 1815, § 1, 6 Sm. Laws, 286.” Before this conclusion can be sustained, it is necessary for the master to make a finding of fact, definite and particularized, relative to the commission of the crime of adultery. It follows that this case must be remanded to the master.

This case is remanded to the master for such further action as he may deem proper, not inconsistent with the views expressed in this opinion.

Prom M. M. Burke, Shenandoah, Pa.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 Pa. D. & C. 234, 1928 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 53, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rix-v-rix-pactcomplschuyl-1928.