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

CASE DIGESTS BY TITLEof His Paramour's Children. [In the Interest ofC.L., P.G., Appeal of Pierson, 436 Pa. Super. 630,648 A.2d 799 (1994))]. 16(5):11-12.Sexual Assault Alone Does not Establish Standingin Protection from Abuse Cases. [Scott v. Shay,928 A.2d. 312 (Pa. Super. 2007)]. Michael E.Bertin. 29:137-39Sexual Relations do not Necessarily Toll ThreeYear Separate and Apart Period. [Thomas v.Thomas, 335 Pa. Super. 41, 483 A.2d 945 (1984)].5:648-50.Shared Custody Act Interpreted by PennsylvaniaSupreme Court. [Karis v. Karis, 518 Pa. 601, 544A.2d 1328 (1988)]. 9(5):45-46.Shared Custody–Criteria Needed to beEstablished. [Beck v. Beck, 86 N.J. 480, 432 A.2d63 (1982); In Re: K., 299 Pa. Super. 504, 445 A.2d 1243 (1982)]. 3:314-18.Shared Custody Case. [Smith v. Smith, 307 Pa.Super. 544, 453 A.2d 1020 (1983)]. 4:418-22.Shared Custody Order Vacated for Infant.[Wiseman v. Wall, 718 A.2d 844 (Pa. Super.1998)]. Susan N. Dobbins. 21:6-8.Shared Legal Custody: Public School VersusPrivate School. [Dolan v. Dolan, 378 Pa. Super.321, 548 A.2d 632 (1988)]. 9(5):46-47.Significance of Retirement Date in PensionValuation. [Demarco v. Demarco, 787 A.2d 1072(Pa. Super. 2001)]. Julie A. Auerbach and WilliamE. Ehrich. 24:8-9.Social Security Derivative Benefits can be Subjectto Legal Process Under 42 U.S.C.A. § 659. [Silverv. Pinskey, 981 A.2d 284 (Pa. Super. 2009)].Jonathan T. Hoffman. 32:23-25.Sole Proprietorship can have Enterprise GoodwillUnder Facts of Some Cases (But not This One).[Gaydos v. Gaydos, 693 A.2d 1368 (Pa. Super.1997)]. Patricia A. Miles. 19:51-54.Sole Proprietorship does not have Good Will,.[Beasley v. Beasley, 359 Pa. Super. 20, 518 A.2d545 (1986)]. 8:940-46.Some Parents are not More Equal than Others inJoint Custody Arrangements.[Hill v. Hill, 422 Pa.Super. 533, 619 A.2d 1086 (1993)]. 14(3):13.Son Adopted as Adult Can't Collect UnderGrandfather's Will. [Estate of Goal v. Hollifield,380 Pa. Super. 219, 551 A.2d 309 (1988)]. 10:68.Specific Enforcement of Agreement. [Marcolongov. Nicolai, 392 Pa. Super. 208, 572 A.2d 765(1990)]. 11:163-64.Sperm Donor not Liable for Child Support.[Ferguson v. 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.Spousal Support Shall be Based Upon ReasonableNeeds in High Income Cases, not GuidelineFormula. [Mascaro v, Mascaro, 764 A.2d 1085(Pa. Super. 2000)]. Rochelle B. Grossman. 23:13-15.Spouse-Owned Business More Likely to beValued as of Date of Separation, not EquitableDistribution. [Benson v. Benson, 357 Pa. Super.166, 515 A.2d 917 (1993)]. 14(4):7-8.SSI Considered Other Household Income forDeviation from Pennsylvania Supreme CourtGuidelines Order. [Landis v. Landis, 456 Pa.Super. 727, 691 A.2d 939 (1997); Rodrigues v.Rodrigues, Allegheny County, FD 86-0293(1997)]. Martha B. Walker. 19:55-57.Standard for Name Change. [In Re: Grimes, 530Pa. 388, 609 A.2d 158 (1992)]. 13(4):4.Standing Denied to Stepgrandfather underGrandparent Visitation Act After Parties hadReconciled. [Helsel v. Puricelli and Puricelli, 927A.2d 252 (Pa. Super. 2007) Reargument Denied2007 Pa. Super. Lexis 2206 (Filed 7/30/07)].50