Filter This View

  • H.S. v. J.P.S.

    Publication Date: 2024-02-23
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Chester County
    Judge: Judge Verwey
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 2018-01294-CU

    In this §1925(a) opinion, the court urged the Superior Court to affirm its final custody order as the proper relief and supported by the record.

  • Kish v. Kish

    Publication Date: 2024-02-23
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stevens
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 636 MDA 2023

    Trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the doctrine of paternity by estoppel did not apply and in ordering genetic testing to determine child's paternity because child had a relationship with appellee and his family throughout his life to which appellant, through his action and inaction, acquiesced. Affirmed.

  • Smith v. Smith

    Publication Date: 2024-02-16
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lycoming County
    Judge: Judge Linhardt
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 17-21,166

    The court denied defendant's motion for Special Relief/Declaratory Relief.

  • In re Adoption of J.M.B.

    Publication Date: 2024-02-09
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Kunselman
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 467 WDA 2023

    Orphans' court properly denied mother's petition to have godmother adopt child because mother's proposed adoption did not satisfy the purpose of the Adoption Act's relinquishment requirement, the proposed adoption would not create a new parent-child relationship, nor would it protect the integrity and stability of a new family unit. Affirmed.

  • In the Interest of J.F.

    Publication Date: 2024-02-09
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stabile
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 1774 EDA 2023

    Trial court committed legal error by preventing child's legal and best interest attorneys from participating in child's in camera interview in contravention of Pa.R.J.C.P. 1128(A)-(B) and 1134 during a dependency and reunification hearing. Vacated.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Chester County Court Rules 2024

    Authors:

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • B.C. v. C.P.

    Publication Date: 2024-02-09
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Todd
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 8 WAP 2023

    Appellants appealed the trial court's denial of their motion to dismiss appellee's complaint to establish paternity. The court reversed and remanded, holding that a marital couple's separation prior to the filing of a paternity action does not, per se, preclude application of the presumption of paternity.

  • Linn v. Perrotti

    Publication Date: 2024-02-02
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry: Real Estate
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stabile
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 2808 EDA 2022

    Trial court erred in refusing to impose a constructive trust on funds from a home sale, based on fact neither party held title to the home, because trial court had the authority to impose a constructive trust using the proceeds of the home sale and it was not relevant that defendant did not hold title to the property. Vacated.

  • Mullen v. Mullen

    Publication Date: 2024-01-29
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Bucks County
    Judge: Judge McMaster
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: A06-20-61132-D-37

    The court issued its §1925(a) opinion in support of its order assigning marital values to various pieces of property owned by the divorcing couple and its order of a 50/50 equitable distribution and asserted it did not abuse the broad discretion afforded judges in determining those questions and applying the factors set forth in 23 Pa. C.S.A. §3502(a).

  • Estate of A.J.M.

    Publication Date: 2024-01-29
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry: Legal Services
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Bender
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 962 WDA 2022

    Denial of law firm's petition for fees and costs did not itself deprive couple subsequently adjudicated incapacitated of their choice of counsel, but the trial court exercised its discretion to deny fees and costs where it found the firm's services to be unreasonable or unnecessary. Orders of the trial court affirmed.

  • In the Interest of K.C.

    Publication Date: 2024-01-15
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Lazarus
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 487 WDA 2023

    Trial court correctly determined that changing the goal to permanent legal custodianship was in child's best interest, where child had been hospitalized for failure to thrive, and although father had substantially complied with his service plan goals and shown he was capable of parenting child, mother did not have the same parenting capacity and father would be unable to provide the "irreducible minimum requirements" since he was also a parent to three other young children. Affirmed.