Filter This View

  • In re: Adoption of D.M.C. and A.L.C.

    Publication Date: 2018-07-24
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Strassburger
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0857

    Trial court erred by involuntarily terminating parental rights where it appointed counsel without expressly stating whether counsel would advocate for children's best interests or would serve children's statutory right to counsel representing their legal interests. Order of the trial court vacated, case remanded.

  • S.T. v. R.W.

    Publication Date: 2018-07-24
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Kunselman
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0864

    Trial court erred in denying incarcerated mother's request for telephone contact with her daughter and in awarding sole legal custody to father because trial court's failure to notify mother of her right to request that she be present at the hearing via writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum was reversible error and trial court erroneously determined the extent of mother's "supervised physical custody" without proper consideration of all relevant factors. Order vacated.

  • Support Center for Child Advocates v. DHS

    Publication Date: 2018-07-17
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Commonwealth Court
    Judge: Judge Covey
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0832

    Bureau of hearings and appeals properly held that child's guardian ad litem was not entitled to intervene in child's father's appeal from the expungement hearing because GAL had no right to intervene under SPO rule1 or §35.28 of GRAPP since GAL stated no interest such that his participation was in the "public interest" and child's interest in the expungement hearing was the same as that of DHS and was protected by DHS. Affirmed.

  • In re RL, III

    Publication Date: 2018-07-17
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lycoming County
    Judge: Judge McCoy
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0771

    Clear and convincing evidence supported the involuntary termination of a father's parental rights where he was incarcerated and failed to make use of available resources to form and maintain a connection with the child.

  • In re J'K.M.

    Publication Date: 2018-07-17
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Shogan
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0831

    Trial court erred in refusing to appoint a separate guardian ad litem, in case where attorney was both child's attorney and GAL, because 16 year-old child and GAL had diametrically opposed positions on child's placement and the divergent opinions constituted a conflict. Reversed.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Library of California Employment Law Forms

    Authors:

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Hvizdak v. Linn

    Publication Date: 2018-07-10
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Stabile
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0810

    Trial court properly dismissed husband's complaint seeking to recuse the entire Butler County bench and asserting RICO, abuse of process and wrongful use of civil proceedings against wife and her attorneys. Affirmed.

  • In re: AD1, AD2 and AB

    Publication Date: 2018-07-10
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lycoming County
    Judge: Judge Linhardt
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0774

    While father demonstrated love for his three children, the record established that he failed to perform his parental duties for a period of at least six months immediately preceding the filing of a petition to terminate parental rights during father's incarceration and concurrent lack of effort to contact or care for the children. The court granted a petition to involuntarily terminate father's parental rights.

  • Hanrahan v. Bakker

    Publication Date: 2018-07-10
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Supreme Court
    Judge: Justice Baer
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0767

    Courts obligated to consider reasonable needs of children in determining support obligations in high-income cases. Order of the superior court vacated, case remanded.

  • In the Interest of A.J.K.

    Publication Date: 2018-07-03
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge McLaughlin
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0794

    Trial court properly terminated father's parental rights because Department of Human Services presented clear and convincing evidence for termination under §§2511(a)(1), (2), (5) and (8) where the record supported the factual findings that father did not have the capacity to parent the child and that termination was in the child's best interests. Affirmed.

  • In the Interest of T.J.J.M.

    Publication Date: 2018-07-03
    Practice Area: Family Law
    Industry:
    Court: Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Ott
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: 18-0795

    Trial court abused its discretion in changing child's placement goal to adoption and in involuntarily terminating father's parental rights because the goal change occurred when child had been in placement less than the statutory 15-22 months and omitted any findings as to father's compliance and testimony demonstrated that the causes of father's parental incapacity could be removed. Vacated and remanded.