Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 1965–2024 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Millergreen2 sentences2024The determination of Father’s monthly net income, i.e., available cash flow for meeting child support obligations, would, as discussed supra, necessitate a calculation of Father’s wages, as well as his monthly net income from his business enterprise without taking into consideration certain allowable deductions provided by the Federal Income Tax Code, i.e., depreciation expenses.8 See Miller, 198 A.2d at 375 (stating, “[t]he net income of a [parent] as shown on income tax returns is not to be accepted in a support case as the infallible test of his[, or her,] earning capacity”). 1981The above principle was again affirmed in Commonwealth v. Miller, 202 Pa.Super. 573 , 198 A.2d 373 at 375 (1964), The net income of a defendant as shown on income tax returns is not to be accepted in a support case as the infallible test of his earning capacity. | 6 | 9 |
Murphy v. Murphygreen1 sentence2017Particularly is this true where the defendant is in business for himself and is allowed substantial business ‘expenses,’ items of depreciation and sundry other deductions which enable him to live luxuriously before spending his taxable income.” Murphy v. Murphy, 599 A.2d 647, 651 (Pa. Super. 1991) (citations omitted). -6- J. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth ex rel. Gitman v. Gitman
green
2 sentences1976Gitman v. Gitman, 428 Pa. 387 , 237 A.2d 181 (1968); Commonwealth ex rel. 1976Gitman v. Gitman, 428 Pa. 387 , 237 A.2d 181 (1968); Commonwealth ex rel. | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Hecht v. Hecht
green
2 sentences1973Hecht v. Hecht, 189 Pa. Superior Ct. 276 , 150 A. 2d 139 (1959); Fishman, supra. “The net income of a defendant as shown on income tax returns is not to be accepted in a support case as the infallible test of his earning capacity. 1973Hecht v. Hecht, 189 Pa. Superior Ct. 276 , 150 A. 2d 139 (1959); Fishman, supra. “The net income of a defendant as shown on income tax returns is not to be accepted in a support case as the infallible test of his earning capacity. | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.