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

CASE DIGESTS BY TITLESuper. 2007)]. Sally R. Miller. 29:123-24.Gruber Analysis Applied to Inter-County Case.[Bednarek v. Velazquez, 830 A.2d 1267 (PaSuper. 2003)]. David S. Pollock. 25:99-100.Gruber Applied to Shared Custody Case aComponent of Best Interests. [Thomas v. Thomas,739 A.2d 206 (Pa. Super. 1999)]. Cheryl L.Young. 21:119-20.Gruber Factors Applied to Intrastate CustodyRelocation Case. [Perrott v. Perrott, 713 A.2d 666(Pa. Super. 1998)]. Michael L. Kleiman. 20:59-61.Gruber Factors are Only a Part of a Best InterestAnalysis When Court Makes Initial CustodyDetermination in a Relocation Situation. [Hurleyv. Hurley, 754 A.2d 1283 (Pa. Super. 2000)].Candice L. Komar. 22:62-63.Gruber Test not Controlling Where ChildrenRelocated Pursuant to Earlier Order. [R.M.G., Jr.v. F.M.G., 986 A.2d 1234 (Pa. Super. 2009)].Elizabeth H. Cepparulo. 32:22-23.The Guidelines are the Guidelines are theGuidelines. [Terpak v. Terpak, 697 A.2d 1006(Pa. Super. 1997)]. Carol S. Mills McCarthy.19:77-79.Guidelines Deviation in Support Cases Must beSubstantiated. [Anzalone v. Anzalone, 449 Pa.Super. 201, 673 A.2d 377 (1996)]. David L.Ladov. 18(3):3-5.Guidelines for Relocation Custody Disputes. [Leev. Fontine, 406 Pa. Super. 487, 594 A.2d 724(1991)]. 12(4):9-10.Half a Credit is Better Than Whole in AwardingRental Value of Marital Residence toDispossessed Spouse. [Trembach v. Trembach,419 Pa. Super. 80, 615 A.2d 33 (1992)]. 13(6):8.He Who Hesitates in Establishing Paternity is LostWith Respect to Visitation, Panel Declares.[Everett v. Anglemeyer, 425 Pa. Super. 587, 625A.2d 1252 (1993)]. 14(4):15-16.Hearsay Exception: Unavailability for Trial. [Corlv. Kacmar, 391 Pa. Super. 376, 571 A.2d 417(1990)]. 11:145.Hearsay Statements in Sexual Abuse Case.[Philadelphia County Department of HumanServices, Division of Children And Youth v. Com.of Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare,135 Pa. Cmwlth. 542, 581 A.2d 704 (1990)].12(1):8-9.Heart Balm Act Held Inapplicable to Causes ofAction for Fraud And Negligent Representation,Arising Out of A Bigamous Marriage. [Lampus v.Lampus, 541 Pa. 67, 660 A.2d 1308 (1995)].17(5):6.Home State Jurisdiction in Custody Cases andTest of Significant Connections. [Zimbicki v.Zimbicki, 810 A.2d 168 (Pa. Super. 2002)].MarkR. Galzerano. 25:7-8.Homeward Bound: Pennsylvania Supreme CourtSets Stricter Jurisdictional Standards in CustodyCases. [Dincer v. Dincer, 549 Pa. 309, 701 A.2d210 (1997)]. Carol A. Behers and Elizabeth Lacy.20:4-6.Homosexual Partners are not Spouses QualifiedUnder Pa. Adoption Act. [In re: Adoption ofR.B.F. and R.C.F., 762 A.2d 739 (Pa. Super.2000)]. and. [In re: Adoption of C.C.G. and Z. C.G. 762 A.2d 724 (Pa. Super. 2000)]. Stanley J.Margle. 23:8-9.Homosexuality is Relevant Factor in CustodyDecision. [Constant A. v. Paul C. A., 344 Pa.Super. 49, 496 A.2d 1 (1985)]. 6:748-54.Horner v. Horner, A Subsequent Case Note.James E. Mahood. 20:43-44.Husband Estopped from Asserting Invalidity ofForeign Divorce Decree. [Lowenschuss v.Lowenschuss, 396 Pa. Super. 531, 579 A.2d 377(1990)]. Emanuel A. Bertin. 11:154-55.Husband Found in Contempt of Support Order.[Lowenschuss v. Lowenschuss, 323 Pa. Super.381, 470 A.2d 970 (1983)]. 5:543-46.34