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

CASE DIGESTS BY TITLE27:58-59.Temporary Award of Alimony Pendente Lite andSupport is not Appealable. [Lowenschuss v.Lowenschuss, Montgomery Co., No. 81-17813(1982)]. 3:310.Temporary Institutionalization Does not ConstitutePermanent Challenge in Circumstances. [R.C. v.J.S., 957 A.2d 759 (Pa. Super. 2008). Scott L.Levine. 30:215-16.Tenancy by the Entireties is Subject to aCreditor's/ Mother's Judgement for DelinquentChild Support. [Coscia v. Hendrie, 427 Pa. Super.585, 629 A.2d 1024 (1993)]. 14(4):5-6.The Tender Years Act. [Fidler v. Cunningham-Small, 871 A.2d 231 (Pa. Super. 2005)]. Joseph P.Martone. 27:56-57.Termination of Child Support Order Pursuant toRule. [1]910.19(e) Does not Automatically Bar aLater Claim for Post-Majority Support. [Style v.Shaub, 955 A.2d 403 (Pa. Super. 2008)]. CherylB. Krentzman. 30:208-11.Termination of Parental Rights–Revisited. [In Re:Adoption of M.M., a Minor, Appeal of J.M. andC.B., 492 Pa. 457, 424 A.2d 1280 (1981)]. 2:130.Termination of Parental Rights Under theAdoption Act of 1970. [In Re VoluntaryTermination of Parental Rights to MLO, Appeal ofKO, 490 Pa. 237, 416 A.2d 88 (1980); In ReL.A.G., Appeal of M.G.B., 490 Pa. 54, 415 A.2d44 (1980); In Re M.A.K.,489 Pa. 587, 414 A.2d1052 (1980); In Re M.L.H., Appeal of M.H., 490Pa. 54, 415 A.2d 29 (1980); In Re D.K.W.,Appeal of C.J.W., 490 Pa. 134, 415 A.2d 69(1980); In Re Adoption of F.D.S. and G.M.S.,Appeal of C.S.S., 490 Pa. 43, 415 A.2d 23 (1980);Lehman, v. Lycoming County Children's ServicesAgency, 1980 U.S. App. Lexis 15451 (3d Cir.1980)]. 1:90-96.Termination of Relationship With Paramour Priorto Trial will not Preclude Finding of Cohabitation.[Moran v. Moran, 839 A.2d 1091 (Pa. Super.2003)]. Margaret Lucas. 26:6-7.Termination of Support on Remarriage. [Purdue v.Purdue, 398 Pa. Super. 228, 580 A.2d 1146(1990)]. 11:196-97.Terms of Settlement Agreement Override CaseLaw Regarding Pension Valuation Date. [Bianchiv. Bianchi, 859 A.2d 511 (Pa. Super. 2004)].Mindi J. Hodge and Randi J. Silverman. 26:108-9.Test for Hearsay Evidence in Sexual Abuse Cases.[G.W.K. v. Com. of Pa., Dept. of Welfare, 125 Pa.Cmwlth. 512, 558 A.2d 151 (1989)]. 10(4):105-6.The Test for Innocent and Injured Spouse.[Hunsinger v. Hunsinger, 381 Pa. Super. 453, 554A.2d 89 (1989)]. 10(2):81-82.Test for Reimbursement Alimony/Equity: UnjustEnrichment. [Bold v. Bold, 374 Pa. Super. 317,542 A.2d 1374 (1988)]. 9:21-22.Testamentary Appointment of a Guardian for aMinor Child is Controlling and not MerelyDirectory. [In re: Slaughter, 738 A.2d 1013 (Pa.Super. 1999)]. James G. Keenan. 22:5-7.A Thin Line Distinguishing Billhime: WhatConstitutes Enough Evidence to Establish aChild’s “Significant Connection” withPennsylvania to Maintain Jurisdiction Over aCustody Matter? Rennie v. Rosenthol, 995 A.2d1217 (Pa. Super. 2010)]. Joanna K. Conmy.32:141-44.Third Parties May be on Equal Footing, But doThey Have Equal Standing? [In RE: G.C., 449 Pa.Super. 258, 673 A.2d 932 (1996)]. David L.Ladov. 18(3):8-11.Third Parties Now on Equal Footing in CustodyCases–Supreme Court Apparently OverrulesPresumption in Favor of Parents. [Rowles v.Rowles, 542 Pa. 443, 668 A.2d. 126 (1995)].David L. Ladov. 18(1):6-7.Third Party Standing Clarified in Child CustodyCases. [Gradwell v. Strausser, 416 Pa. Super. 118,610 A.2d 999 (1992)]. Emanuel A. Bertin.13(3):2.56