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

CASE DIGESTS BY TITLESupport Judgments Act. [Stewart v. Stewart, 743A.2d 955 (Pa. Super. 1999)]. Joel S. Todd. 22:36-38.Superior Court Finds Tax Refund Retains theCharacter of the Payment from Which It wasWithheld. [Cerny v. Cerny, 440 Pa. Super. 550,656 A.2d 507 (1995)]. 17(3):5.Superior Court Grants Standing to a LesbianPartner to Seek Partial Custody. [J.A.L. v. E.P.H.,453 Pa. Super. 78, 682 A.2d 1314 (1996)].Bernard D. Faigenbaum. 18(4):3-6.Superior Court Holds that Non-Custodial Parent isnot Entitled to Reduction in Child SupportProportionate to the Amount of Time Non-Custodial Parent has Custody of Children.[Connor v. Connor, 434 Pa. Super. 288, 642 A.2d1136 (1994)]. 16(4):6-7.Superior Court Holds that South Carolina Courthas Jurisdiction Over Support Action Under theProvision of URESA. [Bratton v. Jury, 435 Pa.Super. 110, 644 A.2d 1259 (1994)]. 16(4):8-9.Superior Court Imposes Contractual Duty of GoodFaith and Fair Dealing in Performance andEnforcement on Parties to a Marriage SettlementAgreement. [Herzog v. Herzog, 887 A 2d. 313].(Pa. Super. 2005)]. David C. Schanbacher. 28:8-10.Superior Court Offended by Abuse of Discretionin Carbon County Court of Common Pleas andOverturns Award of Custody to father. [Wiskoskiv. Wiskoski, 427 Pa. Super. 531, 629 A.2d 996(1993)]. 14(5):9-12.Superior Court Reaffirms Trial Court’s Discretionto Apply Gruber to Intrastate Relocations, Rejectthe Recommendation of a Custody Evaluator, andIncrease the Custodial Time of the Non-Petitioning Parent. [Masser v. Miller, 909 A.2d846 (Pa. Super. 2006)]. Cheryl B. Krentzman.29:15-17.Superior Court Recognizes Precedential Power ofCommonwealth Court’s Abolition of CommonLaw Marriage and Limit Its ProspectiveApplication to Common Law Marriages EnteredAfter September 13, 2003. [Stackhouse v.Stackhouse, 862 A.2d 102 (Pa. Super. 2004)]. AnnM. Funge. 27:9-10.Superior Court Remands Custody Case, Based onInsufficiency of Trial Court's Opinion, in Light ofMother's Status as Illegal Alien and AllegedFailure to Properly Supervise. [Alfred v. Brazton,442 Pa. Super. 381, 659 A.2d 1040 (1995)].17(5):6-7.Superior Court Reverses Trial Court’s Inclusion ofRetained Earnings in Computing DisposableIncome for Support. [Fennell v. Fennell, 753 A.2d866 (Pa. Super. 2000)]. Carolyn Moran Zack.22:59-61.Superior Court Rules No Due Process Violation ina Paternity Matter Where an Acknowledged Fatherdid not Receive Notice Nor a Timely HearingWhen Mother Filed for Child Support Against aThird Party. [Wieland v. Wieland, 948 Pa. Super.863 (Pa. Super. 2008)]. Ann M. Funge. 30:154-56.Superior Court Rules that Binding ArbitrationProvision in Custody Cases not AutomaticallyEnforceable. [Miller v. Miller, 423 Pa. Super. 162,620 A.2d 1161 (1993)]. 14(3):2-3.Superior Court Rules That Relevant ValuationDate for Closely-Held Business InterestControlled Exclusively by One Party Post-Separation is Date of Distribution. [Smith v.Smith, 904 A.2d 15 (Pa. Super. 2006)]. Ann M.Funge. 28:96-97.Superior Court Says No to Netherlands ChildRelocation Request. [Fuehrer v. Fuehrer, 906 A.2d1198 (Pa. Super. 2006)]. Michael E. Bertin. 29:6-8.Superior Court Upholds Child Support AwardBased on Presumptive Minimum from UniformGuidelines Even Though Child's Actual ExpensesWere One-Fifth of the Presumptive MimimumAmount. [Gowdy v. Kesserling, 455 Pa. Super. 57,686 A.2d 1343 (1996)]. David J. Steerman. 19:31-33.53