index to the pennsylvania family lawyer volumes 1-32 compiled by ...

CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTReasonable Prospect of Recovery. [Plunkard v.Mcconnell, 962 A.2d 1227(Pa. Super. 2008)]. SophiaPaige Paul. 31:13-14.Rule 1910.23: not a Tool to Change a Support Order.[O'neill v. Gioffre, 384 Pa. Super. 579, 559 A.2d 588(1989)]. 10(4):103-4.Same Sex Domestic Partner’s in Loco Parentis StandingCarries a Child Support Obligation. [L.S.K. v. H.A.N.,813 A.2d 872 (Pa. Super. 2002)]. Margaret T. Lucasand H. William White, III. 25:12-13.Section 501(f) of Divorce Code Permits Enforcement ofSupport Obligations Made Subject to a Consent DecreeUnder §503 of Divorce Code. [Hopkinson v.Hopkinson, 112 Montg. Co. L. Rep. 351 (1983)].4:490.Seizing of Personal Settlement Proceeds Permitted forChild Support Enforcement. [Campbell v. Walker;Appeal of: Department of Public Welfare, 982 A.2d1013 (Pa. Super. 2009)]. Christine Gale. 32:5-7.A Severance Payment and Distribution of an AccuralAccount Income for Support or Assets for EquitableDistribution? [Berry v. Berry 898 A.2d. 1100 (Pa.Super. 2006)]. David C. Schanbacher. 28:102-4.Sperm Donor not Liable for Child Support. [Fergusonv. McKiernan, 940 A.2d 1236 (Pa. 2007)]. Bruce L.Wilder. 30:10-11.Spousal Support Order Entered During PendingDivorce Case Unappealable. [Leister v. Lesiter, 453 Pa.Super. 576, 684 A.2d 192 (1996)]. Rochelle B.Grossman. 19:3-5."Stay at Home Mom" of Second Marriage Toddler hasNo Support Obligation for First-marriage TeenagerTriggering Debate by Divided Panel. [Atkinson v.Atkinson, 420 Pa. Super. 146, 616 A.2d 22 (1992)].14(1):5-6.Superior Court Addresses Appealability of SpousalSupport Orders. [Calibeo v. Calibeo, 443 Pa. Super.694, 663 A.2d 184 (1995)]. 17(4):7.Superior Court Affirms Modification of Support OrderDue to Changed Circumstances. [Farbaugh v. Killen,436 Pa. Super. 480, 648 A.2d 60 (1994)]. 16(5):6-7.Superior Court Disapproves Practice of Including SetPercentage of the Income of a Parent's New SpouseWhen Calculating Support. [McCarty v. Smith, 440 Pa.Super. 280, 655 A.2d 563 (1995)]. 17(3):5-6.Superior Court does Away With Unallocated SupportOrders in Divorce Actions. [Dubin v. Dubin, 372 Pa.Super. 84, 538 A.2d 1362 (1988)]. 9(2):12.Superior Court Finds Condonation is an AdequateDefense to Adultery as it Precludes Spousal Support.[Hoffman v. Hoffman, 762 A.2d 766 (Pa. Super.2000)]. Jean Gilroy Gavlick. 23:9-10.Superior Court Finds Four Year Statute of LimitationsInapplicable to Registration of Foreign SupportJudgments Act. [Stewart v. Stewart, 743 A.2d 955 (Pa.Super. 1999)]. Joel S. Todd. 22:36-38.Superior Court Holds that Non-Custodial Parent is notEntitled to Reduction in Child Support Proportionate tothe Amount of Time Non-Custodial Parent has Custodyof Children. [Connor v. Connor, 434 Pa. Super. 288,642 A.2d 1136 (1994)]. 16(4):6-7.Superior Court Holds that South Carolina Court hasJurisdiction Over Support Action Under the Provisionof Uresa. [Bratton v. Jury, 435 Pa. Super. 110, 644A.2d 1259 (1994)]. 16(4):8-9.Superior Court Upholds Trial Court Order AwardingSpousal Support to Wife Who Left Marital Residenceupon Disclosure that Husband was a Transvestite.[McKolanis v. McKolanis, 435 Pa. Super. 103, 644A.2d 1256 (1994)]. 16(4):4-6.Support Action Brought Under New Statute ofLimitations Survives Despite Res Judicata RulingUnder Former Statute. [Fornwalt v. Follmer, 420 Pa.Super. 413, 616 A.2d 1040 (1992)]. 14(1):7-8.Support–Arrearages–Proceeds from Post-DivorcePartition can be Used to Satisfy Arrearages. [Moyer v.Moyer, 292 Pa. Super. 434, 437 A.2d 752 (1981)].2:216-18.Support Case–Hearing De Novo Means Hearing Anew.[D'Arciprete v. D'Arciprete, 323 Pa. Super. 430, 47096