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

CASE DIGESTS BY TITLEIrretrievable Breakdown has been Alleged asGrounds for Divorce in Complaint.]. [Rueckert v.Rueckert, 1 A.C.D.D. 55, 20 D.&C.3d 191(Allegh. Co., 1981)]. 2:161-63.Distinction Between Spousal Support andAlimony Pendente Lite. [Horn v. Horn, 388 Pa.Super. 46, 564 A.2d 995 (1989)]. 10:123.Distribution Order Giving Wife the MiningEquipment and "The Shaft" Must be Revised.[Beener v. Beener, 422 Pa. Super. 351, 619 A.2d713 (1992)]. 14(2):13-15.Division of Marital Property: Factors Considered.[Powell v. Powell, 395 Pa. Super. 345, 577 A.2d576 (1990)]. 11:171-73.Divorce Decree does not Automatically TerminateRight of Party as Beneficiary. [Stowell v. Stowell,3d Cir., No. 84-1037 (Oct. 26, 1984)]. 5:656-58.Divorce Decree Insufficient to Divest Beneficiaryof ERISA Pension Plan In Absence of Change ofBeneficiary According to Plan Document.Kennedy, Executrix of the Estate of Kennedy,Deceased v. Plan Administrator for DupontSavings and Investment Plan et al. 129 S. Ct. 865,172 L.Ed.2d 662 (2009)]. Caren E. Morrissey.31:4-5.Divorce–Simultaneous Actions in Two Counties.[Bem v. Bem, 30 Chester Co. Rep. 276 (1982)].3:340.Divorce–Two Cases can be Pending in TwoCounties Until Appellate Courts Rule Otherwise.[Ravetz v. Ravetz, Montg. Co., No. 80-10116(1981)]. 2:186-87.Doctrine of Paternity by Estoppel Examined. [Inthe Matter of Green v. McCoy, 437 Pa. Super.606, 577 A.2d 1341 (1994)]. 17(1):2-3.Doctrine of Presumption of Paternity is Alive butnot Kicking. [Miscovich v. Miscovich, 455 Pa.Super. 437, 688 A.2d 726 (1997); Ruth F. v.Robert B., Jr. (listed as Fish v. Behers)], 456 Pa.Super. 398, 690 A.2d 1171 (1997)]. Dagmar W.Wolf. 19:27-29.Does the Nurturing Parent Doctrine Still Exist inPennsylvania? [Doherty v. Doherty, 859 A.2d 811(Pa. Super. 2004)]. Caren E. Morrissey. 26:107-8.Domestic Relations Subpoena Approved For Useat Support Hearing. [Knight v. Northwest SavingsBank, et al., 747 A.2d 384 (Pa. Super. 2000)].Jeffrey M. Williams. 22:38.Domicile Governs Divorce Jurisdiction. [Sinha v.Sinha, 834 A.2d 600 (Pa. Super. 2003)]. Kate E.McDonnell. 26:43-44."Domino Effect" of Grandparent's Visits onMother's Depression and her Treatment of ChildBars Them from Visitation. [Norris v. Tearney,422 Pa. Super. 246, 619 A.2d 339 (1993)].14(3):12-13.Early Retirement Incentive Benefits. [Meyer v.Meyer, 561 Pa. 225, 749 A.2d 917 (2000)]. GaryJ. Friedlander. 22:63-65.Earning Capacity and Nurturing Parent Doctrine inSupport Cases. [Kelly v. Kelly, 430 Pa. Super. 31,633 A.2d 218 (1993)]. 14(5):3-4.Earning Capacity vs. Earning History: If a Partyhas been a Farmer for Ten Years; He is a Farmer.[Dennis v. Whitney, 844 A.2d 1267 (Pa. Super.2004)]. Daniel J. Clifford. 26:44-45.Educational Support Case Remanded, Where TrialCourt Incorrectly Considered Items such asPersonal Expenses, Clothing and Travel Expenses,and Where Court Proceeded in the Absence of aCritical Child Witness. [Grieve v. Mankey, 443Pa. Super. 101, 660 A.2d 1367 (1995)]. 17(5):4.Effect of 401.1(b) on Pre-1988 PropertySettlement Agreements. [Brangs v. Brangs, 407Pa. Super. 43, 595 A.2d 115 (1991)]. 12(4):4-5.Effect of Bankruptcy Action on DivorceProceeding. [In Re Murray v. Murray and Ganz,31 B.R. 499 (1983)]. 4:473.Effect of Cohabitation on Alimony Agreement.[Vankirk v. Vankirk, 336 Pa. Super. 502, 485A.2d 1194 (1984)]. 5:654-55.28