• Long v. Long

    Publication Date: 2022-08-15
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Kunselman
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 22-0911

    Although a child support amount arising from a marital settlement agreement that converted to alimony did not constitute equitable alimony, spouse's remarriage did not preclude them from receiving alimony where the agreement did not expressly state that alimony could terminate upon remarriage. Order of the trial court vacated, case remanded.

  • Solomon v. Parente

    Publication Date: 2022-08-08
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Western
    Judge: District Judge Dodge
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 22-0879

    Husband moved to dismiss plaintiff's state tort claims against him in her action asserting claims against husband and claims against state trooper for denying her equal protection based on her gender for trooper's failure to investigate and take action on husband's violations of a protection from abuse order and court found the actions of husband and trooper did not derive from a common nucleus of operative fact. Motion granted.

  • Wise v. Wise

    Publication Date: 2022-08-08
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lycoming County
    Judge: Judge Lindhart
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 22-0840

    Court denied a preliminary objection and request to dismiss a protection order where the defendant claimed the court lacked personal jurisdiction over him due to his residence in South Carolina. Although plaintiff resided with defendant in South Carolina for a majority of their marriage, they returned to Pennsylvania frequently, and even temporarily moved back at some point. The court found that under Pennsylvania's long-arm statute, defendant had sufficient minimum contacts within the state such that the court had personal jurisdicti

  • Raymond v. Raymond

    Publication Date: 2022-08-08
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Kunselman
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 22-0882

    Trial court erred in finding grandparents failed to establish standing under 23 Pa.C.S.A. §5324(4) when both of child's adoptive parents were deceased because parents could not posthumously exercise care and control of child, a third party's in loco parentis status did not preclude another third party from seeking custody under §5324(4) and appointment of a guardian had no effect on standing to file custody. Vacated.

  • In the Interest of: K.G.

    Publication Date: 2022-07-25
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Olson
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 22-0824

    Adjudication of delinquency for unauthorized use of an automobile vacated where commonwealth presented no evidence that appellant knew or had reason to know that he did not have the vehicle's owner's permission to operate the vehicle. Order of the trial court vacated.

  • Cicardo v. Cicardo

    Publication Date: 2022-07-11
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Carbon County
    Judge: Judge Matika
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 22-0699

    Court partially granted defendant's request for "exceptions to the hearing office report." Specifically, the court reasoned that although defendant failed to appear at court and did not properly present evidence regarding the division of his assets, they nevertheless found that the evidence presented in defendant's request for an exception to the order was reasonable given that defendant was able to later demonstrate that the court's orders at the time were contrary to the evidence contained in the record.

  • In re: Adoption of: D.G.J.

    Publication Date: 2022-07-04
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Lazarus
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 22-0743

    Trial court erred in dismissing petition to adopt a foreign-born child under §2908 of the Adoption Act, where there was no foreign adoption decree to register under §2908 and petitioners were U.S. citizens and residents of the commonwealth. Decree of the orphan's court reversed, case remanded.

  • Collins v. Collins

    Publication Date: 2022-07-04
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
    Judge: Judge McMaster
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 22-0669

    Court denied mother's appeal from a trial court decision allowing paternal relatives to have contact with her daughter arguing that this constituted a visitation order which was not in the best interests of her daughter. The court clarified that their order allowing the contact with the paternal relatives was only a contact order arising from father's paternal rights and therefore no separate "visitation order" was issued.

  • In re: HB

    Publication Date: 2022-07-04
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lycoming County
    Judge: Judge Tira
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 22-0662

    While mother demonstrated some bond with her minor child, that bond did not defeat the termination of her parental rights to make way for adoption by the child's step-grandfather where mother's mental health and substance abuse issues rendered her incapable of caring for the child. The court granted a petition for involuntary termination.

  • York v. Galasso

    Publication Date: 2022-07-04
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
    Judge: Judge Corr
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 22-0672

    The court denied father's petition to modify an existing support order, which he filed less than two weeks after the parties had reached an agreement, because father failed to demonstrate through clear and convincing evidence a material and substantial change in circumstances. The court of common pleas recommended affirmance.