Edgar v. Edgar

Citations

• 23 Pa. Super. 220
• 1903 Pa. Super. LEXIS 43

Syllabus

<p>Divorce — Master—Act of March 10,1899, P. L. 8 — Revision by court.</p> <p>The Act of March 10, 1899, P. L. 8, which provides for the appointment of a master in a divorce proceeding, “ who shall take the testimony and return the same together with a report of the proceedings before him and his opinion of the case to the court,” was not intended to substitute the opinion of the master for a trial by jury or full consideration of the evidence by the court which makes the final decree.</p> <p>The opinion of the master is merely advisory to the court, which it may accept and act upon or disregard in whole or in part according to its judgment as to the weight of the evidence or his legal conclusions. It was not intended that the court should abdicate its duty to determine by its own judgment the controversy presented and devolve that duty upon one of its officers.</p> <p>Where the appellate court is satisfied that the court below has given a careful scrutiny to the evidence and the master’s findings of fact, conclusions of law, and discussion, it will not reverse a decree confirming the master's report.</p> <p>Divorce — Alimony—Amount.</p> <p>When it appears that the respondent, the husband, in a libel for divorce a mensa et thoro, has property of a fair value of $90,000, and an income found by the master and the court below to be about $4,000 per year, a decree awarding to the wife an allowance of $1,300 per year will not be reversed by the Superior Court.</p>