CASE DIGESTS BY TITLEEquitable Distribution, Alimony and Counsel FeeCase. [Romeo v. Romeo, 42 Bucks Co. L. R. 39(1983)]. 4:487-89.Equitable Distribution and Alimony Award. [Regliv. Regli, 111 Montg. Co. L.R. 119 (1982)]. 3:362-66.Equitable Distribution and Alimony–WifeAwarded 65% of Marital Estate. [Stan<strong>to</strong>n v.Stan<strong>to</strong>n, 112 Montg. Co. L. Rep. 234 (1983)].4:484-87.Equitable Distribution Applies <strong>to</strong> Small LawPractice, Superior Court Declares. [Naddeo v.Naddeo, 426 Pa. Super. 131, 626 A.2d 608(1993)]. 14(4):3-4.Equitable Distribution–Assets Valued as of DateHearing. [Treasure v. Treasure, 2 A.C.D.D. 170(Allegh. Co., 1982)]. 3:306.Equitable Distribution Award Case. [Pangallo v.Pangallo, Westmoreland Co., No. 8650 of 1979(1983)]. 4:444-47.Equitable Distribution: Buy-Out Remedy. [Ryan v.Ryan, 391 Pa. Super. <strong>32</strong>7, 571 A.2d 392 (1990)].11:130-31.Equitable Distribution Case. [Ruth v. Ruth, 316Pa. Super. 282, 462 A.2d 1351 (1983)]. 4:453-58.Equitable Distribution Case. [Benner v. Benner,42 Bucks Co. L. R. 99 (1983)]. 4:474-78.Equitable Distribution Case. [Wichers v. Wichers,6 A.C.D.D. 67, 1<strong>32</strong> P.L.J. 146 (1984)]. 5:546-49.Equitable Distribution Case–Date of ValuationAnd Classification as Martial Property. [Diamondv. Diamond, 360 Pa. Super. 101, 519 A.2d 1012(1987)]. 8:980-84.Equitable Distribution, Counsel Fees and Costs.[Baraff v. Baraff, 4 A.C.D.D. 1 (Allegh. Co.,1983)]. 4:409-13.Equitable Distribution–Grounds for Divorce mustExist Before Court can Decide. [Oliver v. Oliver,39 Bucks Co. L.R. 130 (1982)]. 3:341.Equitable Distribution is Constitutional. [Bank v.Bank, Philadelphia Co., Nov. Term 1980 No.2993 (1981); Kline v. Kline, Lancaster Co., No.166 Oct. 1979 (1981)]. 2:178-81.Equitable Distribution is Constitutional. [Schwartzv. Schwartz, Montg. Co., 81-3684 In Divorce,A.V.M. (1981)]. 2:210-12.Equitable Distribution is Constitutional.[Bacchetta v. Bacchetta, 498 Pa. 227, 445 A.2d1194 (1982)]. 3:290-93.Equitable Distribution of Police Pension. [Endy v.Endy, 412 Pa. Super. 398, 603 A.2d 641 (1992)].13(2):2-3.Equitable Distribution of Property–OutrightAward of Marital Home <strong>to</strong> Husband. [Hovey v.Hovey, Warren Co., No. 417 of 1980 (1981)].2:181-82.Equitable Distribution: Possibility of Inheritancenot Included. [Gruver v. Gruver, 372 Pa. Super.194, 539 A.2d 395 (1988)]. 9(2):14.Equitable Distribution–Pensions. [Kikkert v.Kikkert, 177 N. J. Super. 471, 427 A.2d 76(1981)]. 2:218-20.Equitable Distribution/Validity of Waiver inAgreement. [Holz v. Holz, 850 A.2d 751 (Pa.Super. 2004)]. Rochelle Grossman. 26:42-43.Equitable Distribution (W/80%, H/20%)–AnAward Made <strong>by</strong> <strong>the</strong> Court Rehabilitative Alimony,Counsel Fees (75%). [Reese v. Reese, Montg. Co.No. 80-21492 (1981)]. 2:222-23.Equitable Distribution (W/100%, H/0%)–AnAward Made <strong>by</strong> <strong>the</strong> Court Rehabilitative Alimony,Counsel Fees. [Kiesel v. Kiesel, 19 D.&C.3d 792(Montg. Co. 1981)]. 2:220-22.Equitable Distribution–Wife Awarded Interest inHusband's Pension. [Dean v. Dean, 2 A.C.D.D.227 (Allegh. Co., 1982)]. 4:447-49.30
CASE DIGESTS BY TITLEEquitable Es<strong>to</strong>ppel Doctrine: Child Support <strong>by</strong>Stepparents. [DeNomme v. DeNomme, 375 Pa.Super. 212, 544 A.2d 63 (1988)]. 9:35.Equitable Powers of <strong>the</strong> Court <strong>to</strong> Modify anEquitable Distribution Order More Than 30 DaysFollowing <strong>the</strong> Entry of a Divorce Decree.[Johnson v. Johnson, 864 A.2d 1224 (Pa. Super.2004)]. Stephanie H. Winegrad. 27:51-52.Equitable Provisions of Divorce Code GoverningDisposition of Property, not Applicable <strong>to</strong>Transfers of Property Made Prior <strong>to</strong> EffectiveDate of Code. [Krenzelak v. Krenzelak, 503 Pa.373, 469 A.2d 987 (1983)]. 4:505-9.Equitable Reimbursement Camouflaged asAlimony. [Zullo v. Zullo, 395 Pa. Super. 113, 576A.2d 1000 (1990)]. 11:156-57.Equitable Reimbursement When Marital AssetsJust are not Enough. [Wang v. Feng, 888 A.2d.882 (Pa. Super. 2005)]. Sarinia A.Michaelson.28:15-16.ERISA Preempts Pennsylvania Law When ItComes <strong>to</strong> Employer Sponsored Plans DesignatingEx-Spouses as Beneficiaries. [In Re Estate of PaulJ. Sauers, 971 A.2d 1265 (Pa. Super. 2009)]. CarlaMarino. 30:148-50.ERISA Trumps State Law. [Egelhoff v. Egelhoff,5<strong>32</strong> U.S 141, 149 L.Ed.2d 264, 121 S. Ct. 1<strong>32</strong>2(2001)]. David I. Grunfeld. 23:37-38.Estrangement Defense Held Inapplicable in HigherEducation Support Case, Where Estrangement wasnot Proven <strong>to</strong> be Unilateral on <strong>the</strong> Part of <strong>the</strong>Child. [Rudick v. Rudick, 441 Pa. Super. 558, 657A.2d 1307 (1995)]. 17(5):4.Estrangement is a Consideration in AwardingCollege Support. [Milne v. Milne, 383 Pa. Super.177, 556 A.2d 854 (1989)]. Emanuel A. Bertin.10:88-89.Estrangement is a Two-Way Street for Fa<strong>the</strong>rSeeking <strong>to</strong> Avoid Child's College Tuition. [Reif v.Reif, 426 Pa. Super. 14, 626 A.2d 169 (1993)].14(4):13-14.Even Non-Dependent Spouses may ReceiveAlimony Pendente Lite <strong>to</strong> Defray Costs ofMaintaining Divorce Action. [Powers v. Powers,419 Pa. Super. 464, 615 A.2d 459 (1992)].14(1):6.Even "Worthless" S<strong>to</strong>ck Still Subject <strong>to</strong> "Buy-Out" Valuation for Equitable Distribution.[Harasym v. Harasym, 418 Pa. Super. 486, 614A.2d 742 (1992)]. 13(6):3-4.Evidence Sufficient for Protection fromAbuseOrder Despite Absence of Physical Injury.[Mescanti v. Mescanti, 956 A.2d 1017 (Pa. Super.2008)]. Darren J. Holst. 30:211-13.Expectancies are Relevant Fac<strong>to</strong>rs <strong>to</strong> beConsidered in Equitable Distribution. [Moritz v.Moritz, Allegh. Co., FD 82-07811 (1984)]. 5:630-<strong>32</strong>.Expectancies not Relevant in EquitableDistribution Cases. [Hutnik v. Hutnik, 369 Pa.Super. 263, 535 A.2d 151 (1987)]. 9:2-3.Explana<strong>to</strong>ry Comments <strong>to</strong> Revised Rule1910.19(f) Prevent Arrears <strong>to</strong> be Remitted DuringObligor’s Incarceration. [Nash v. Herbster, 9<strong>32</strong>A.2d 183 (Pa. Super. 2007)]. Linda A. Kerns.29:125-6.Extrinsic Fraud: Petition <strong>to</strong> Vacate DivorceDecree. [Foley v. Foley, 392 Pa. Super. 9, 572A.2d 6 (1990)]. 11:144-45.Fac<strong>to</strong>rs Relied on in Expunging Sexual AbuseReport. [J.S. v. Com., 528 Pa. 243, 596 A.2d 1114(1991)]. 12(6):4-5.Fac<strong>to</strong>rs <strong>to</strong> be Considered in Determining ifGoodwill Exists. [Campbell v. Campbell, 357 Pa.Super. 483, 516 A.2d 363 (1986)]. 7:908-12.Failure <strong>to</strong> Adhere <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> Pennsylvania Rules ofAppellate Procedure can Preclude Review of anAppellant’s Arguments. [In Re K.T.E.L, 983 A.2d745 (Pa. Super. 2009)]. Lynnore K. Sea<strong>to</strong>n. <strong>32</strong>:12-14.Failure <strong>to</strong> Inform Employer RE: Divorce Subjects31
- Page 1 and 2: INDEXTO THEPENNSYLVANIA FAMILY LAWY
- Page 3 and 4: TABLE OF CONTENTSPreface ..........
- Page 5 and 6: Support-Guidelines ................
- Page 7: 13. Sidebar .......................
- Page 10 and 11: PREFACEPeriodicals serve an importa
- Page 12 and 13: 3. CASE DIGESTSLadov, David L, Edit
- Page 14 and 15: CASE DIGESTS BY AUTHORSProvision in
- Page 16 and 17: CASE DIGESTS BY AUTHORS1997)]. 19:5
- Page 18 and 19: CASE DIGESTS BY AUTHORSFunge, Ann M
- Page 20 and 21: CASE DIGESTS BY AUTHORSInitial Cust
- Page 22 and 23: CASE DIGESTS BY AUTHORSMcKillop, Do
- Page 24 and 25: CASE DIGESTS BY AUTHORSSuper. 2010)
- Page 26 and 27: CASE DIGESTS BY AUTHORSReaches Age
- Page 28 and 29: 3 B. CASE DIGESTS BY TITLE19-Year-O
- Page 30 and 31: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLEObjections to
- Page 32 and 33: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLEBuy-Out Remedy
- Page 34 and 35: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLESuperior Court
- Page 36 and 37: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLE[Waddington v.
- Page 38 and 39: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLEIrretrievable
- Page 42 and 43: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLEEmployee to Li
- Page 44 and 45: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLESuper. 2007)].
- Page 46 and 47: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLEEither Party's
- Page 48 and 49: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLELocal Rule Whi
- Page 50 and 51: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLEMeaning of Ann
- Page 52 and 53: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLEParties can Ob
- Page 54 and 55: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLEPension Distri
- Page 56 and 57: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLEModification.
- Page 58 and 59: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLE386 A. 2d 129
- Page 60 and 61: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLEof His Paramou
- Page 62 and 63: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLESuperior Court
- Page 64 and 65: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLESuperior Court
- Page 66 and 67: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLE27:58-59.Tempo
- Page 68 and 69: CASE DIGESTS BY TITLE(Pa. Super. 20
- Page 70 and 71: C ASE D IGESTS BY T ITLEEstate of B
- Page 72 and 73: CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTPhillips. 32
- Page 74 and 75: CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTATTORNEYS FE
- Page 76 and 77: CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECT663 A.2d 768
- Page 78 and 79: CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECT31:15-18.Pen
- Page 80 and 81: CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTv. L.R.M., 7
- Page 82 and 83: CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTSuper. 461,
- Page 84 and 85: CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTPa. Super. 3
- Page 86 and 87: CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECT10(2):80-81.
- Page 88 and 89: CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTEquitable Di
- Page 90 and 91:
CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTDebts. [Gran
- Page 92 and 93:
CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTDeath Abates
- Page 94 and 95:
CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECT[(Haentjens
- Page 96 and 97:
CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTEquitable Di
- Page 98 and 99:
CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTPornography
- Page 100 and 101:
CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECT[McConnell v
- Page 102 and 103:
CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTFinal Divorc
- Page 104 and 105:
CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTIn Loco Pare
- Page 106 and 107:
CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTReasonable P
- Page 108 and 109:
CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTUnauthorized
- Page 110 and 111:
CASE DIGESTS BY SUBJECTGuidelines D
- Page 112 and 113:
Pa. Super. 52, 581 A.2d 670 (1990)]
- Page 114 and 115:
TABLE OF CASES REPORTEDBarrone v. B
- Page 116 and 117:
TABLE OF CASES REPORTEDCalabrese v.
- Page 118 and 119:
TABLE OF CASES REPORTED470 A.2d 995
- Page 120 and 121:
TABLE OF CASES REPORTEDFratangelo v
- Page 122 and 123:
TABLE OF CASES REPORTEDHollman v. H
- Page 124 and 125:
TABLE OF CASES REPORTEDIn the Inter
- Page 126 and 127:
TABLE OF CASES REPORTEDLampus v. Es
- Page 128 and 129:
TABLE OF CASES REPORTEDMcGinn v. Mc
- Page 130 and 131:
TABLE OF CASES REPORTEDOrange v. Or
- Page 132 and 133:
TABLE OF CASES REPORTEDRoussos v. R
- Page 134 and 135:
TABLE OF CASES REPORTEDSteenland-Pa
- Page 136 and 137:
Wolk v. Wolk, 318 Pa. Super. 311, 4
- Page 138 and 139:
ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY AUTHOR18(1
- Page 140 and 141:
ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY AUTHORMatr
- Page 142 and 143:
ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY AUTHORLado
- Page 144 and 145:
ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY AUTHORAbou
- Page 146 and 147:
ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY AUTHORRobe
- Page 148 and 149:
ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY AUTHORVoss
- Page 150 and 151:
5B. ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY TITLEA
- Page 152 and 153:
ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY TITLEKenne
- Page 154 and 155:
ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY TITLEHow t
- Page 156 and 157:
ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY TITLEPermi
- Page 158 and 159:
ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY TITLETermi
- Page 160 and 161:
ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY SUBJECTSua
- Page 162 and 163:
ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY SUBJECTImm
- Page 164 and 165:
ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY SUBJECTEQU
- Page 166 and 167:
ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY SUBJECTPol
- Page 168 and 169:
ARTICLES AND COMMENTS BY SUBJECTMcF
- Page 170 and 171:
6. FEDERAL/MILITARY CORNER.Sullivan
- Page 172 and 173:
Grunfeld, David I. Pennsylvania Fam
- Page 174 and 175:
Mahood, James E. and Gary M. Gilman
- Page 176 and 177:
12. SECTION NEWSSteiner, William L.
- Page 178 and 179:
Judge Strassburger’s Rejoinder. 2
- Page 180:
Montgomery Bar Initiative Cheers Up