Filter This View

  • Ayoub v. Ayoub

    Publication Date: 2019-08-26
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry: Real Estate
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Adams County
    Judge: Judge Simpson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0921

    The court lacked personal jurisdiction over wife with respect to the equitable division of property in this divorce case, because the parties' last marital domicile was in another state and wife had only limited contact with Pennsylvania.

  • C.T.E. v. D.S.E.

    Publication Date: 2019-08-12
    Practice Area: Civil Procedure | Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Lazarus
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0941

    Appeal quashed where appellant failed to file separate notices of appeal from each docket number on appeal.

  • In the Interest of: D.R., a minor

    Publication Date: 2019-08-12
    Practice Area: Administrative Law | Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Kunselman
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0942

    Trial court violated right against unreasonable search and seizure by ordering parents to submit to home inspection by CYS when agency lacked probable cause for its request to compel the inspection, and lacked statutory authority to compel a parent to take a drug test absent a dependency adjudication. Order of the trial court vacated.

  • Humphrey v. Gallop

    Publication Date: 2019-08-12
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Monroe County
    Judge: Judge Higgins
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0891

    Where most of the factors to be considered in this custody dispute favored neither party, the court found that it was in the minor children's best interest to remain in their current school and for mother to retain primary physical custody provided she remained in the same school district. The court denied father's petition to modify custody.

  • D.R.L. v. K.L.C.

    Publication Date: 2019-08-12
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge McLaughlin
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0943

    Trial court properly overruled grandparents' exceptions to custody order where trial court thoroughly addressed statutory best interest factors and properly considered mother's concern with grandparents' interference into parenting issues. Order of the trial court affirmed.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    New Jersey Estate & Trust Litigation 2024

    Authors: Michael R. Griffinger, Paul F. Cullum III, Cathleen T. Butler

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Chrzan v. Medina

    Publication Date: 2019-08-12
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Monroe County
    Judge: Judge Higgins
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0892

    Where mother testified insincerely that she did not intend to keep the parties' minor child away from father and she continued to allude to father's alleged misconduct, which was unfounded, it was in the child's best interest for father to have primary physical custody. The court granted father's petition to modify custody.

  • RP v. KF

    Publication Date: 2019-08-12
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lycoming County
    Judge: Judge McCoy
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0861

    In this custody modification matter, the court did not abuse its discretion in denying mother's requests regard childcare arrangements and school district designation. Rather, the court's decisions were based on the child's best interest.

  • Lopez v. Acosta

    Publication Date: 2019-08-05
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lehigh County
    Judge: Judge Pavlack
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0834

    The court awarded shared custody to the parties, because the non-parent rebutted the presumption in favor of the biological parent and continuing the parties' week-to-week custody arrangement was in the child's best interest.

  • In Re: J.W.B.

    Publication Date: 2019-07-29
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Murray
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0873

    Pennsylvania law, rather than the law of the jurisdiction where a parent consenting to adoption resided, applied to provide the standards for an enforceable consent to adoption and the standards for a valid revocation of that adoption. Decree affirmed.

  • C.M. v. M.M.

    Publication Date: 2019-07-29
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Shogan
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 19-0871

    The trial court erred in failing to consider the best interest factors set forth in 23 Pa.C.S. §5328(a) where mother's custody petition specifically requested a change in custody of the parties' minor child. The appellate court reversed and remanded.