Tag Archive for: custody

PA Children’s Trust Fund

Most family law actions that will be filed include a filing fee for the initial complaint or pleading. A part of these filing fees go to fund the Pennsylvania Children’s Trust Fund (CTF). This fund has received approximately $40 million dollars from family law filing fees since inception. The initiative of the CTF is to prevent child abuse and neglect across the state. The main emphasis of CTF is to put prevention programs in place to decrease child abuse and neglect overall. The CTF grants its money to local community programs with the same initiatives. It is up to the respective community programs to apply with CTF to see if they are eligible for a grant. Currently, upwards of 250 community based programs across the state have received grants to aid in the fight against child abuse and neglect.

The PA CTF recently established a supporting organization, “Friends of the Children’s Trust Fund.” The goal of this supporting organization is to raise additional awareness and financial support for the mission of the CTF. The fund focusing on prevention due to the negative and potentially long-term impacts of abuse and neglect including, but not limited to, poor physical, mental, and emotional health, social difficulties and behavioral problems. There is also a corresponding economic impact associated with dealing the aftermath of abuse and neglect making an even greater case for the importance of prevention. Many other states across the country also have a similar fund to aid in the prevention of child abuse and maltreatment.

Please visit pactf.org for more information on the Children’s Trust Fund in Pennsylvania.

by

Types of Custody

Custody refers to the rights of a parent or other adult to be responsible for a minor. In family law there are several types of custody that may come into play. Sec 5322 defines all the different variations of custody. First, there is legal custody versus physical custody. Legal custody is defined as “the right to make major decisions on behalf of the child, including but not limited to, medical, religious and educational decisions.” As it relates to legal custody, it can either be shared between the parents or other responsible parties meaning they have to consult with one another and agree on the major decisions or one parent/party can have sole legal custody and make any decision on their own.

Physical custody is defined as “the actually physical possession and control of a child.” There are several scenarios that can play out as far as physical custody. First, it can be shared between the parents/parties. Shared, or joint, custody is generally understood to mean equal or 50/50 time. There can also be sole physical custody meaning one parent/party has physical possession of the child all the time. Another form of physical custody is primary physical custody. Primary custody grants the right to have possession of the child the majority of the time. In a situation where one parent/party has primary, the other parent/party would be deemed to have partial physical custody. Partial custody means they have the child for less than a majority of the time. Physical custody can be supervised if needed in which case it would need to be determined who would supervise the custody time be it an agency of the court, one of the parties involved, or a third party. The term “visitation” is used interchangeably with partial custody.

Click here to read more on custody.

by

Hurricane Sandy

Our area is still recovering from the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. The storm’s strong winds and rain caused widespread damage over a large area of the nation. Specifically, southeastern Pennsylvania is still dealing with power outages due to downed trees and wires. Many government offices, schools and local courts were forced to close Monday and Tuesday of this week. At this point, all local courts in southeastern PA are open and may be contacted as far as any matters that need to be rescheduled. Our office hopes everyone has remained safe during the storm. We will continue to work hard to assist you in all your family law needs as our communities continue to recover from the aftermath.

 

by

Emancipation

Emancipation terminates a parent’s obligation to support their child. Emancipation generally occurs when a minor reaches the age of 18 and has graduated high school. Whether a minor can be emancipated even before that time is a fact-intensive analysis. An emancipated minor must demonstrate they are able to assume all legal responsibility for themselves. Factors that are often considered include the child’s age, marital status, ability to support themself, and the desire to live independently of their parents. A decision on emancipation would be made based on the totality of the circumstances after examining all the facts in any given case.

Even if a minor is determined to be emancipated, it is not necessarily a permanent determination. If the circumstances supporting emancipation change, the child may no longer be considered emancipated. Based on PA case law, a minor’s marriage weighs heavily in favor of finding emancipation. Other key factors based on case law include the child moving out of the parent’s home and having a job to support themselves. Often times, emancipation may be raised if the child stops attending school prior to completion, particularly by parents who do not believe they should continue to be liable for support.

by

Jurisdiction/Venue in Divorce

,

Under Pennsylvania law, one of the parties to the divorce action must have been a bona fide resident of Pennsylvania for at least six months prior to the commencement of the divorce. Bona fide residence is defined as actual residence with domiciliary intent. Domicile denotes the place where a person has his or her true, fixed, permanent home with the intention of returning after any absence. In other words, where an individual sleeps, takes her meals, receives mail, and stores personal possession.

Generally, an action may only be brought in the county where one of the party resides. There are two exceptions allowing a divorce action to proceed in a different county including by mutual agreement of the parties in writing or by participating in the action started in a different county. If two divorce actions are commenced within 90 days of each other, the county where a party resides or where the last marital residence was located gets to determine which county should handle the matter. If neither county is the location of the last marital residence and no party resides in either county, the county that received a complaint in divorce first can make the determination as far as which county will proceed.

Parties should be careful about agreeing to, or participating in, divorce actions outside of their home counties if property distribution and/or other issues such as custody and support may be raised during the divorce. A divorce action may need to be transferred to the county where the bulk of the property is located or where the children reside for custody or where one of the parties reside for support. This will likely result in the expense of having to file a new complaint in the appropriate county as well as the expense and delay of petitioning to have the matter transferred. On the other hand, parties with no issues relating to the divorce may benefit from a cheaper filing fee by choosing a county other than their own for the divorce action.

Click here to read more on Divorce.

by

Paternity in Family Law

When an unmarried woman has a child, paternity will need to be established before a father can be listed on the birth certificate, before the mother can seek support from the father and/or before standing for custody can be established. Establishing paternity can be as simple as the father executing an acknowledgment of paternity. The acknowledgment indicates the father is waiving his rights to any genetic testing or trial on the issue of paternity. If a father is unwilling to execute an acknowledgment or is simply unsure of the paternity of the child, genetic testing can be conducted so that the DNA results can be examined. Both parents will be ordered to participate in genetic testing. Failure to appear by the father can result in a court order declaring him as the father by default. Failure to appear by the mother can result in the court dismissing an action for support. Tests results alone are not sufficient to establish paternity. Instead, the parties must stipulate in writing that the test results prove paternity or the court must make an order on paternity after reviewing the test results.

Once an acknowledgment of paternity is signed, it is very difficult for a father to then try to allege the child is not his. An acknowledgment acts as conclusive evidence that the person who signed the acknowledgment is in fact the father of any subject child(ren). A court order on paternity will follow if the results indicate 99% probability of paternity. If paternity is established by court order, the decision is generally not immediately appealable. Instead, the appropriate time to appeal on the issue of paternity would be after a subsequent final child support or custody order. There is one exception to this rule based on paternity by estoppel. Paternity by estoppel recognizes a man as the father based on his role in the child’s life rather than the biological connection. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has recognized that paternity by estoppel is immediately appealable so as to protect the established parent-child relationship. In the most recent case, genetic testing proved that a child born to a married woman was not her husband’s child but rather the product of an affair. The paramour tried to file for custody and genetic testing proved he was the father however the court would not allow the custody order to go into effect due to the fact the husband had raised the child all along.

by

Contempt of Court

Be it divorce, custody or support, once a court order is put in place, any violation of that court order can be considered contempt. For example, if a custody order provides that the parents are to exchange custody every Wednesday and the exchange never occurs to the fault of one party, the faulting party is in contempt. The consequences of being held in contempt can vary. 23 Pa. C.S. 5323 (g) regarding contempt of custody provides for any one of the following as punishment: imprisonment for a period not to exceed six months, a fine not to exceed $500, probation for a period not to exceed six months; and/or counsel fees and costs. In practice, based on the severity of the case, the Judge may just give a verbal warning or may suspend custody until the court order is complied with.

Contempt of a support order occurs when a party fails to keep up with their support hearing. At a support contempt hearing, the non-compliant party will have an opportunity to explain why they are not current with their support. In the event they are unemployed, the court may inquire into why they are not working, their physical ability or inability to work, and what attempts to find employment have been made. There may be contempt of an order in a divorce matter both while the divorce is still pending and after the divorce. For example, if one party succeeds in getting exclusive possession of the home during the divorce and the other party attempts to re-enter the home, there is a basis for contempt. Post-divorce contempt usually involves one party failing to follow through with their obligations under a settlement agreement or divorce judgment.

 

by

Pet Custody Battles

Many people consider their pets as members of the family and accordingly, when the family breaks up, custody of the pets can become an issue. The Today Show recently covered a story of a man who had already spent $60,000 in a custody battle over his dog previously shared with his ex-girlfriend. While pets may be considered members of the family from the perspective of the owners, the courts in Pennsylvania deal with pets the same way as they deal with other inanimate personal property in the event of a divorce.

First, a count for Equitable Distribution must be raised in the context of a divorce in order to get the court involved in dividing any property. There are generally two options available when it comes to how property will be divided. First, the parties can reach an agreement on how they will divide property and submit this written agreement to the court so that in the event either party does not comply, the disgruntled party can file for contempt and the court can assist in enforcing the agreement. The other option when it comes to property division is to go to a hearing and let the court decide. If you go this route, the court will likely give the pet to one spouse or the other just as it would any other personal property such as furniture or TVs. It is not likely to get involved in creating a schedule to continue to share the pet post-divorce.

The great thing about an agreement is that it can be as specific as the parties want. The courts rarely get involved in the content of agreements that are knowingly and voluntarily entered into and treat them as binding just as they would any other contract. Therefore, an agreement could provide for a custody schedule more similar to one you would normally see with children. For example, the spouses may decide to split custody of the family pet and lay out the terms of when they will exchange custody back and forth (i.e. every two weeks, every month, etc.). Or, the parties may even agree that the schedule for family pet will coincide with the schedule for their minor children if applicable.

More on Dividing Property

Today Show story on pet custody battle

by

Custody Relocation and Alternative Forms of Visitation

Pennsylvania’s custody relocation statute, 23 PA C.S. 5337, requires the party seeking relocation to get court approval or the other parent’s permission prior to relocation. A relocation is defined as any move that would “significantly impair the ability of the nonrelocating party to exercise custodial rights.” 23 Pa C.S. 5322. 25 percent of the 35 million children with separated, divorced or single parents have a parent that lives a significant distance from the other parent, limiting the amount of traditional custody time with the non-custodial parent. In addition to giving notice of the proposed relocation and petitioning the court if the other party won’t consent, the party seeking relocation is to submit a proposed order outlining the custody schedule in the event of a relocation. As with any custody decision, the party seeking relocation must show how the relocation is in the child’s best interests. A party seeking relocation should use the proposed order to demonstrate their genuine intent to ensure the nonrelocating party will still have a strong relationship with the child(ren) as a Judge will usually believe maintaining a strong parent-child relationship is in the child’s best interests. This responsibility to prove that a strong parent-child relationship will continue has become easier with the development of social media and video calling services. In fact, the term “virtual visitation” has been coined to describe the opportunities for parents and children to remain touch through the use of technology.

There are several different programs that make it easy for people who live in different places to stay in touch. Skype has become a popular service which allows people to see each other while talking to one another other the internet. FaceTime is a software program available on many cell phones which also allows simultaneous live video streaming in the context of a phone call. Many use Facebook to keep in touch by sharing photos, sending messages, etc. It is now commonplace to include terms for virtual visitations in custody orders where the parents live in different places. Such an order would lay out how often the virtual visits will occur and how long they will last (i.e. Parties will Skype on Tuesdays at 8pm for 30 minutes). A Judge may even order a party to get the appropriate software or equipment to ensure such virtual visitation can take place if they do not have the necessary components already. Several states have laws on the books expressly governing virtual visitation. While Pennsylvania does not expressly reference virtual visitation in its statutes, Judges in the Commonwealth have been including provisions on virtual visitation in custody orders made in the context of relocation.

Read more on Child Custody & Visitation

by

Obesity as Custody Factor

The issue of obesity among both children and adults is a regular topic in the news. It is also being addressed more and more often in the realm of family law. Parents in a custody dispute may allege the other parent is not a fit parent because of their own weight problems. The argument then follows that the parent will not be able to provide proper care for the child because he or she won’t be able to keep up with the child. Alternatively, parents may hurl allegations at each other because of the child’s weight problems. Here, arguments may be made that a parent is not looking out for the best interest of the child because he or she allows the child to eat predominantly unhealthy things or doesn’t promote adequate exercise. This failure to ensure an appropriate diet and active lifestyle puts the child at risk for developing serious medical problems such as diabetes or heart disease. It may also subject the child to additional ridicule from their peers damaging their self-esteem and psychological well-being.

Pennsylvania specifically alludes to a child’s physical well-being as one of the factors to be considered in making a custody award based on the child’s best interests. This factor was added when the custody laws were revamped effective January 2011. 23 PA CS §5328 (10) mandates the court to consider which party is more likely to attend to the daily physical, emotional, developmental and special needs of the child. Accordingly, it is relevant to discuss concerns with one parent’s weight and its potential to hinder their ability to provide basic hands-on care for the child. It is also relevant to raise the issue of how a party’s parenting is or isn’t beneficial to the child’s physical well-being. Child obesity is becoming a real epidemic with potential lifelong consequences and a Judge would be remiss not to consider which parent is taking the appropriate measures to provide a healthier lifestyle for their child.

More on Child Custody

by