Commonwealth ex rel. Kaplan v. Kaplan

Dissenting Opinion by

Jacobs, J.:

I must respectfully dissent.

In Commonwealth ex rel. McNulty v. McNulty, 226 Pa. Superior Ct. 247, 251, 311 A.2d 701, 703 (1973), we reiterated the well known rule that “ ‘ [i] n a support proceeding, the trial judge who sees and hears the witnesses is in a better position than the Superior Court to decide the issue on its merits.’ Commonwealth ex rel. *32Friedman v. Friedman, 223 Pa. Superior Ct. 66, 67, 297 A.2d 158 [, 159, allocatur refused, 223 Pa. Superior Ct. xxxv] (1972). Absent a clear abuse of discretion an appellate court will not disturb a support order of the court below. Commonwealth ex rel. Sosiak v. Sosiak, 177 Pa. Superior Ct. 116, 118, 111 A.2d 157 (1955).”

Search as I may, I cannot find any abuse of discretion on the part of the lower court which fixed the order at $170.00 per month.

I would affirm the court below.

Price and Van der Voort, JJ., join in this dissenting opinion.