Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout96-02145 --61rll c~ I.,;") (1 ~ \, ;'~ I -. I r, 'I . .:! t~n !'J r~' 1:- ...J .. ~:g ,;.1 , ;() ':'.... -'I , : -l ~ l,C) j.~. ; 'R Irn ,I '-' ~n ..~ , , . . ..- Cumberland County Sheriffs Dept. Weapons Confiscation Dale LIII ~/(H , I Court Order 'I ( _ ,). If" ).. Name of Defendanl k.. ;l h '~~l '" Ii!: (, Address -::'1\' "VC>\"'~ L."k. Jc?.\ . I'" ( "11.. ,\.I t. Telephone ~)<..I'~ - Co ( c;- Number of weapons seized J / I. ( , . 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Make f. .' Model Caliber Serial No. ~ "111 Commenls f./ ) / ,., ._~ -< A--.. ..... SI~nilIU'C Shllllll,;, [Jcpuly /1 '! \1- -i j 'it' , --, /"). .' U /, '" / ~ I ;1 /11.,.,. l.<...1 r . 'VI SI~n"'u'c lkftnd'In' ~.....~ " , , , " .'1(' rn Ft':'7, r U-,7 \: ~ r j 1,'1:: I F ~~(.F. '::! 't (12/,:=:8 25'/38'5'1') It 1)~!28 251) ~S4'51 .It (1'3/(111 25016795 * ').3/05 2.~,~5~a57 . t!3/2<) 2525786') . ,).3/21 2831)54 11 _._ _ .....I:=..f~\~1/25 ~ ..GEf j(\96(1::,~'5I)(1(t()..7r; 1 (14/1.2 .\;" r f.' i'~ ;'..I-..I[ CJr:r- [.;~';I .,I....J.:II'I' 2el) 12963 PFr ....TOP 5-,BOTTOM 6-1NO " ,; ','1.11 I,. ,I t'I'" ';,'It',\1-- : :,Ij 1 ':i"I'1 '. i., ,I', I I- ~ i ,q:l.' . Iii';:: : n '~. -,,'II}I-'," : Ill' '~t- - ~h'I'1 t ',f q"~, ' ChFC t. r~tJ"m!:.f~' F-i~'! OESCR i Ff r UII 1)';\6 I::HEC~~ 1)7\5 CHECf' ...,' ,',r [ "I.~ r~"li_ H~V:i:. '.': .21:\ I) ~ .'~ '..8. l~f! 716 REFl! 25',13857", ,.r:: .74 D i.. t '~8. 5.. 7[5 REFit 25(1.,>;1,,51 2..,.33 11 4,171+.21 718 Rl':Fit 251)10795 '.3:;.33 D '1.68" .88 720 REFill 2'305685'7 t.I)I) l) 3 .683. ~J8 751 FlEEtl r~ 5?-57861) ;:....1)1) D ], 1.:':i9 .i18 7~7 I~EFit 2831)'5..11 5.35 C 31!;6'3.r~'3 07113 CHEC~: 1)721) CHEClr, 1)7'31 CHEO' 1)717 CH,::Cf', INrE~EST PAYMENT 1)719 CHECIC 7-Sa 8-SF 9-ASUM ~5.9~ 0 3.t"".29 7\9 REF~ 28012963 II)-fRll; 11..r.UTO l2-XTFO ..-STSM If;;. /?t- ,j ~ f, () 0 , ' ~ r:,' ~I 4Jrl \'''l , h ~ ..; Q ~ f" - ':~ '\ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ::> ~ ,~ V' .J 'I. '- .. oft ./ '. .... - 4"""" li ~ 'V --' ~ 'I ,', ~ w .~ j g g :> ~ ~ < ~ < ~ ~ ~ ~ !04 z ~ ~ lit AI 1. :1 Z ~ 0 ~ ~ < m ~ ~ " '", : , ~' , ! "It ~ . \ I~~"'-' \ r ., " ~. ,.' ", \ 1 ~ ,: , . ~I" ,f ~ . '1 , I. I; , \ ' , 1 . ( /" ~, :( , ~ ''-'" '~ 'I, ~ I ~ , I I I' I 1 , J i I ',I 'i . '. , , , , I' ........,,1, SANDRA K. SHERIFF. Plaintiff for herself and on behalf of her minor child: LINDSEY K. SHOEMAKER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 96- .J''1'''' CIVIL TERM KEITH L. SHERIFF, Defendant PROTECTION FROM ABUSE TEMPORARY PROTECTION ORDER AND NOW, this ~ day of April, 1996, upon presentation and consideration of the within Petition, and upon finding that the plaintiff, Sandra K. Sheriff, and her minor child, Lindsey K. Shoemaker, now residing at 6 Mountainview Drive, Mount Holly Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, are in immediate and present danger of abuse from the defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, the following Temporary Order is entered. The defendant, Keith L. Sheriff. (SSN: I 86-54-1781)(DOB: 7/15/65), is an adult individual residing at 395 Possum Lake Road, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, is I I ( ,\ hereby enjoined from physically abusing Ihe plaintiff, Sandra K. Sheriff, or her minor child, Lindsey K. Shoemaker, and from placing them in fear of abuse. , t I It' ~ 1 I L , , " The defendant is excluded from the marital residence located at 6 Mountainview Drive, Mount Holly Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, a residence which is jointly owned by the parties. The defendant has been residing with his parents at 395 Opossum Lake Road, Carlisle, since April 14, 1996, when he left the marital residence. The defendant is ordered to Slay away from any residence the plaintiff may in the future " , :'\ , , establish for hersel f, -' The defendant is ordered to refrain from having any direct or indirect contacl with the plaintiff and her minor child including. but not limiled 10, telephone and written communications. The defendant is enjoined from harassing and stalking the plainliff and from harassing her relatives. and the minor child. The defendant is enjoined from entt'ring Ihe plainlift's place of employment and the day care facility of Ihe plaintiff's minor child, The defendant is enjoined from removing. damaging, destroying or selling any property owned jointly by the panies or owned solely by Ihe plaintiff. The defendant is ordered 10 relinquish to the sheriff's department any weapons which he owns, possesses, has used or threatened to use againstlhe plaintiff and her minor child. and the defendant is prohibited from acquiring or possessing any weapons for the dllralion of this Order. A violation of this Order may subject the defendant to: I) arrest under 23 Pa.C.S. 16113; II) a private criminal complaint under 23 Pa,C.S. ~6113.1; III) a charle of Indirect criminal contempt under 23 Pa.C.S. 16114, punishable by Imprisonment up to six months and a nne of 5100.00.51,000.00; and Iv) civil contempt under 23 Pa.C.S. 16114.1. Resumption of c()oltildence on the part of the plaintiff and defendant shall not nullify the provisions of the court order. This Order shall remain in effcctllntil modified or terminated by the Court and can be elltended beyond its original ellpiration dale if the Coun finds Ihatlhe defendant has committed an act of abuse or has engaged in a pattern or pnlctice that indicates risk of harm to the plaintiff or her minor child. A hearing shall be held on this mailer on the 2'day of April, 1996, at i,l , 'i .m., in Courtroom No.i., Cumberland Counly Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. The plaintiff may proceed without pre-payment of fees pending a furlher order after the hearing. The Cumberland County Sheriff's Departmenl shall allempt to make service at Ihc plaintiffs request and withoul pre-payment of fees, but service may be accomplished under any applicable rule of Civil Procedure, This Order shall be dockeled in Ihe office of the Prothonotary and forwarded to the Sheriff for service. The Prothonotary shall not send a copy of this Order to Ihe defendant by mail. The Pennsylvania State Police shall be provided with a certified copy of this Order by the plaintiffs allomey. This Order shall be enforced by any law enforcement agency where a violation occurs by arrest for indirect criminal contempt without warrant upon probable cause that this Order has been violated, whether or not the violalion is commilled in the presence of the police officer. In the event thai an arrest is made, under Ihis seclion. the defendant shall be taken without unnecessary delay before the court that issued the order. When thai court is unavailable, the defendant shall be taken before the appropriate district juslice. (23 Pa.C.S. 06113). By Ihe Court, /lli. Judge SANDRA K. SHERIFF, Plainti ff for herself and on behalf of her minor child: LINDSEY K. SHOEMAKER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 96- ,ll '/ .'. CIVIL TERM KEITH L. SHERIFF, Defendant PROTECTION FROM ABUSE PETITION FOR PROTECTION ORDER RELIEF UNDER TIlE PROTECTION FROM ABUSE ACT, 23 Pa.C.S. 16101 et seq. A. ABUSE I. The plainliff, Sandra K. Sheriff, is an adult individual residing at 6 Mountainview Drive, Mount Holly Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17065. 2. The defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, (SSN: 186-54-1781)(DOB: 7/15/6.5), is an adult Individual residing at 395 Possum Lake Road, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17013. 3. The defendanl is the husband of the plaintiff. 4. Since approximately May of 1994, the defendant has attempted to cause and has I, ~ ' intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly caused bodily injury to the plaintiff and her minor child, has placed the plaintiff and her minor child in reasonable fear of imminent serious bodily injury, and has knowingly engaged in a course of conduct or repeatedly committed acts toward the plaintiff and her minor child, including following the plaintiff without proper authorization, t f. '. jl Police for help. The plaintiff sustained bruising about her Ihigh, red marks about her neck, and a lump and soreness about her head. e) In or about May of 1994, Ihe defendant choked Ihe plaintiff. f) Since approximately May of 1994, the defendant has abused the plaintiff in ways including. but not limited to, slapping, pushing and shoving her about, and choking her. The defendant demanded that the plainliff engage in sexual activities with him, and when she has refused, he threatened to rape her. The defendant also Ihreatened to kill the plaintiff on several occasions and most recently threatened to kill her and her minor child. The plainliff fears for her safety and Ihat of her child. S. The plaintiff believes and Iherefore avers that she and her child are in immediale and present danger of abuse from Ihe defendant should Ihey remain in the home without Ihe defendant's exclusion and that they are in need of protection from such abuse. 6. The plaintiff desires that the defendant be prohibited from having any direct or indirect contact with the plaintiff and her minor child including. but not limited to, telephone and wrillen communications. 7. The plaintiff desires thai the defendant be enjoined from harassing and stalking the plaintiff, and from harassing her relatives. or her minor child. 8. The plaintiff desires that the defendant be restrained from entering her place of employment and the day care facility of her minor child. 9. The plainliff desires that Ihe defendant be enjoined from removing, damaging, destroying or selling any property owned jointly by the parties or owned by Ihe plaintiff. under circumstances which have placed the plaintiff in reasonable fear of bodily injury. This has included, but is not limited to, the following specific instances of abuse: a) On or about April 13, 1996. Ihe defendant shoved the plaintiff with both his hands, dumped a can of beer over her head, Ihrew a can of beer at her, called her vile and humilialing names, and Ihreatened to kill the plaintiff and Lindsey, her 21 month-old daughter from a previous relationship. The defendant further threatened that he had talked to his friends who told him how to "do it" wilhout gelling caught. The plaintiff feared for her life and that of her child. b) In or about February of 1996, the defendant shoved the plaintiff onto the bed, got onlop of her, and demanded that she have intercourse with him. The plaintiff refused and got away from the defendant. c) Since approximately February of 1996, the defendanl has pushed and shoved the plaintiff abouI. and pushed and shoved her minor daughter about causing the child to fall to Ihe floor Oil several occasions. d) In or about December 22. 1995. the defendant slapped the plaintiff in the face repealedly, grabbed her by the neck with both his hands and choked ht:r. The defendant followed the plaintiff to Ihe bathroom, grabbed her by the neck and by her hair, slammed her head into the side of the cabinet, and then slammed her body into the vanity cabinet. The defendant threatened to get his gun and shoot the plaintiff during this incident. Laler the same evening the defendant also threatened 10 take his own life. The plaintiff telephoned the Pennsylvania State 10. The plaintiff desires that any weapons the defendant owns, possesses, and has used or threatened to use against the plaintiff and the minor child be confiscated by the Sherlfrs Department. B. EXCLUSIVE POSSESSION II. The home from which Ihe plainliff is asking the Court to exclude the defendant is owned in the names of Sandra K. Sheriff and Keith L. Sheriff. The defendant left the marital residence on April 14, 1996. and has been residing wilh his parents. 12. The plaintiff currently has no place to stay with her child except the marital home, and the defendant can conlinue to stay with his parents and has other family and friends in Ihe area with whom he can stay. 13. The plaintiff desires possession of the home so as to give the greatesl degree of cOlltinuity to the life of the child. 14. The plaintiff desires the defendant to provide suitable alternate housing for her. C. SUPPORT IS. The defendant has a duty to support the plainliff. 16. The plaintiff is in need of financial support from the defendant including, but not limited to: health insurance coverage. payment of unreimbursed medical expenses for the plaintiff, the mortgage payment on the residence at 6 Mountainview Drive, Mount Holly Springs. Cumberland County. Pennsylvania. 17. The defendant is employed at John Gleim. Inc., and has annual salary of approximately $3S.000. 18. The plaintifrs Income is insufficient to provide for her minimal needs until such time as a support order can be obtained by tiling at the Domestic Relations Office. 19. The plaintiff intends to pelition for support wilhin Iwo weeks of Ihe issuance of a protective order. D. A TIORNEV FEES 20. The plaintiff asks that the defendant be ordered 10 pay reasonable attorney fees to Legal Services, Inc. WHEREFORE, pursuant to the provisions of the "Proteclion from Abuse Act" of October 7, 1976,23 P.S. ~ 6101 ~ X4l" as amended, Ihe plaintiff prays this Honorable Court to grant the following relief: A. Grant a Temporary Order pursuant to the "Protection from Abuse Act:" I. Ordering the defendant to refrain from abusing the plaintiff and her minor child or placing them in fear of abuse; 2. Ordering the defendant to refrain from having any direct or indirect contact with the plaintiff or her minor child including. but not limited to, telephone and written communications; 3. Ordering the defendant 10 refrain from harassing and stalking the plainliff and from harassing her relatives or her minor child; 4. Prohibiting the defendanl from entering the plaintiff's place of employment or the day care facilily of the minor child; S. Prohibiting the defendant from removing, damaging, destroying or selling property jointly owned by the parties or owned by the plaintiff; 6. Granting possession of the home located at6 Mounlainview Drive, Mount Holly Springs, ~umberland Counly, Pennsylvania, to the plaintiff to the exclusion of the defendant pending a final order in this mailer; 7. Ordering the defendant to slay away from any residence the plaintiff may in Ihe fUlure eSlablish for herself; 8. Ordering the defendant to provide suilable alternate housing for the plaintiff, and 9. Ordering the defendant to relinquish to the sheriffs department any weapons which he owns, possesses or has used or threatened to use against the plaintiff and her minor child. and prohibiting the defendant from acquiring or possessing any other weapons for the duration of the order. B. Schedule a hearing in accordance with the provisions of the "Protection from Abuse Act," and. after such hearing, enter an order to be in effect for a period of one year: 1. Ordering the defendant to refrain from abusing the plaintiff or placing her in fear of abuse. 2. Ordering the defendanl to refrain from having any direct or indirect conlact with the plaintiff or her minor child including. but not limited to, telephone and wrillen communications. 3. Ordering the defendant 10 refrain from harassing and stalking the plaintiff and from harassing her rrlatives and her minor child. 4. Prohibiting the defendant from entering the plaintifrs place of employment or the day care facility of her minor child. S. Prohibiting the defendant from removing, damaging, destroying or selling propeny jointly owned by the panies or owned by Ihe plaintiff. 6. Granting possession of the ~ome localed at 6 Mountainview Drive, Mount Holly Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, to the plaintiff to the exclusion of the defendant. 7. Ordering the defendant to stay away from any residence the plaintiff may in the future establish for herself. 8. Ordering the defendanlto provide suitable alternate housing for the plaintiff. 9. Ordering the defendant to relinquish to the sheriff's depanment any weapons which he owns, possesses or has used or threatened to use i 1 , , againstlhe plaintiff and her minor child, and prohibiting the defendanl I f from acquiring or possessing any olher weapons for the duration of the Order. 10. Granting suppon to the plaintiff in the amount of $250.00 per week " " payable to the plaintiff in the form of a check or money order, mailed to r her residence, and ordering the defendant 10 provide health coverage to the plaintiff, directing the defendant to pay all of the unreimbursed I I I medical expenses of the plaintiff to the provider or to the plaintiff when I" \ , -.' she has paid for the medical treatment and directing the defendant to make ~ : I I 0' continue to make mortgllle payments on the residence of the plaintiff. II. Ordering the defendant to pay reasonable attorney fees to Legal Services, Inc. The plaintiff further asks that Ihis Petition be filed and served without payment of f-:es and costs by the plaintiff, pending a further order at the hearing, and that a certified copy of this Petition and Order be delivered to the Pennsylvania State Police which has jurisdiction to enforce this Order. The plaintiff prays for such other relief as may be just and proper. Respectfully submitted. , G) ( .... ~ {; ~ t" , , "",'l,' J.J AL.- ~l.- v (Joan Carey, Attorney ~ laintiff LEGAL SERVICES, INC. 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243.9400 I" ""..: 0.... ~ ~~ "'UJ zffi ~~ 08 :; ~J i ~ "~I ',< :.s d ~ 1:; '" '" '" w III I:: ~ :c 3; Iii ~ t; O>:Swg r.~ ;: i: - ~ i 011 '" '" if I do '" I-~~~~~ ~g~~ ~j c<t;~ :c ~ -. .~ o .... ~ 0-1 .... > .... CJ In <l' ... '" I <0 0\ .... .... .... ..... c: '... , III "'..... ""'" ~ UJ ..... <= '" '" ii ,'" > ~ 2l ~ '" o r.... Z o ....'" t:~ !;;~ '" . 0-1 f3 . :lG r1i ~ '" f':J ~ ~ :: is .... ~ . o z . " . . IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PJ::NNSyr.,VANIA SANDRA K. SHE~IFF, Plaintiff CIVIL ACTION - LAW ~ ' v. KEITI! L. SHERIFF, Defendant NO. 96-2145 ANSWER TO PETITION FOR PROTECTION ORDER AND NOW, this 24th day of April, 1996, comes Defendant, Keith Io. Sheriff, by and through his attorneys, HANFT & VOHS, and files the following Answer to Petition for Protection Order, and 1 ' in support thereof avers as follows: A. ABUSE I, I 1 J" Admi t ted. 2. Admitted with clarification that Defendant did not I' return to the r.esidence at 6 ~lountain View Drive, Mount Holly :: I ;\ ' I, Springs, Pennsylvania, die to Plaintiff's insistence that a protectiQu order has been issued on April 16, 1996. Defendant desires that the Protection Or.der be vacated and that he be per.mitted to return to his residence. .3. Admitted. j. . 4. Denied. Defend&nt specifically denies that he has Rttempted to cause or that he has intentionally. knowingly, or I' I t , , recklessly caused bodily injury to either Plaintiff or her minor child. Defendant specifically denies that Plaintiff is in '~ rea~onable fear of bodily injury: I' 1>1'."11'-1, ~1I1;P,I'l",IJ;'\~l" H ,I 1 l' :\ , ;:1' II a. Denied. Defendant specifically denies the allegations in this paragraph. On April 13, 1996, Defendant's friend gave him inst t'uet ions on how to contact an attorney to file divorce, not to kill his wife. In addition, Defendant specifically denies pushing Plaintiff; rather, as Aoon as Defendant's friend dropped him off at the marital residence, Plaintiff begcln y<.:lll.ng at Def(,ndant, Defendant did not even speak to Plaintiff due to her extreme emotional state of mind. Plaintiff became frustrated that Defendant would not engage in an argument with Plaintiff, and Plaintiff proceeded to pour a can of beer over Defendant's head. After this provocation, Defendant did pour.' a can. uf beer over her head, but then he put it in the sink. Defendant specifically denies throwing the can or any object at Plaintiff. b. Deni~d. Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragraph. Defendant has never pushed Plaintiff onto the bed and demanded sexual intercourse tram Plaintiff. Further, Defendant has never attempted to commit spousal rape with Plaintiff. c. Denied. Defendant specifically denies pushing or showing Plaintiff or her minor child. I~ has never pushed or harm the minor child. Defendant admits that he has in self defense pushed Plaintiff away from him when she is at.tacking him, kicking him in the genitals, ~ 1\,\1, '.. I' 'llIl1~IYl' \~HWI'I\ ~l'>\ 2 10. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require. Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh. and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. B. EXCLUSIVB POSSES ION 11. Denied. Defendant denies that he ieft the marital residence voluntarily. Rather, Plaintiff demanded that Defendant leave the marital house, and Plaintiff changed the locks to the marital residence preventing Defendant from returning to his home. 12. Denied. Plaintiff's parents live ten (10) minutes away, and they have ample room for Plai.nti. f f and her minor child. . 13. Denied. The allegation is thiH paragragh are conclusions of law to which to n'lspon!1e is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if t'elevant. In addition, Plaintiff quit her job at GS Electric, and therefore cannot afford to continue to live in the marital residence. 14. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is dnmanded at ~ "1\ I'" I' ';U~~IH" ^~;ftWt~ 1'1 ,.. 5 18. Denied. 'l'he allegation la this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to l'esponse is necessary. '1'0 the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically deni~s the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if l'elevrlnt.. 19. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to reaponse is necessary. To the extent a response lo require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragrdgh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if. relevant. D. ATTORNEYS FEES 20. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a r€sponse is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. Further, Defendant has retained private counsel tu defend this merit less protection from abuse petition, and to prosecute a divorce so that he can separate his life from Plaintiff due to her marital misconduct. He has and will continue to incur substantial legal fees as a result of Plaintiff's meritlcss claims that have been brought solely to gain a legal advantage in the pending divorce matter since Plaintiff has not incur any legal fees or costs, and will continue to receive tree legal assistance. , 1'l\'''I''IIJljf~tIl.I'''hHWHII'I'^ 7 CBRTIFICATB OF SBRVICE AND NOW, this 24th day of April, 1996, I, William C. Vohs, Esquire, hereby certify that I have this day served the following person with a copy of the foregoing document, by depositing same in the United States Mail, First Class, Postage Prepaid, and by facsimile addressed as follows: Legal Services, Inc. 8 Irvine How Carlisle, PA 17013 FAX (717) 243-8026 ~ W. 11 am C: Vohs, EsqUire Attorney 10 No. 65208 HANFT 6< VOHS 11 West Pomfret Street, Suite 2 Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-5373 I' Uf''''IUY,\lW.IWNl.Wk, 'PA :LO' - I I t \ r !I ... ',f IN THE COURT OF COMMON PI,EAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA SANDRA K. SHERIFF, PlaintH f CIVIL ACTION - LAW v. KEITH I,. SHERIFF, Defendant NO. 96-2145 p'ETITION TO VACATE OR MODIFY ORDER MID NOW, this 24th day of April, 1996, comes Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, by and through his attorneys, HANFT & VOHS, and files the following Petition to Vacate or Modify the Protection from Abuse Order, dated April 19, 1996, and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. The Defendant is Keith L. Sheriff, who currently resides at 395 Opossum Lake Road, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. The Plaintiff is Sandra K. Sheriff, who currently resides at 6 Mountain View Drive, Mount Holly Springs, Carlisle, Cur"berland County, Pennsylvania. 3. The Plaintiff and Defendant are husband and wife 4. The parties were married on May l.3, 1995, in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 5, Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, filed a Complaint in Divorce at 96-2148 Civil Term. on April 19, 1996, at 3:58 p.m. 6. ~laintiff. Sandra K. Sheriff, filed a Petition for Protective Order at 96-2145 Civil Term, on April 19, 1996, just . Ill\ ,,~, I ."'1 ~II' '1'1'1111"" 1'1 .. 1 ........ I,Tr v minutes p~io~ to the filing of the Divo~ce Complaint. 7. Defendant's, Keith L. Sheriff, counsel had previously contacted Plaintiff's, Sandra K. Sheriff's, counsel to inquire intu whether Plaintiff was seeking an ex parte protection Order, and requested that Plaintiff's counsel contact the undersigned when the Court was approached for the ex parte Order so that both part iea' counsel may be heard from the Court. 8. Plaintiff's. Sandra K. Sheriff, counsel however did not contact the undersigned, and a result of which a temporary protection order was entered on April 19, 1996. A true and correct copy of the Order of Court dated April 19, 1996, is attached hereto and made a part hereof and marked as Exhibit "A". 9. Defenant, Kei th L. Sheriff, has filed an Answer thereto, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof and marked as Exhibit "B", 10. Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, desires that the Order of Court dated April 19. 1996, either be vacated, or modified, to allow Defendant the opportunity to hunt Saturday, April 27, 1996, for the Spring turkey season. 11. PlainU,ff, Sandra K, Sheriff, knew that Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, had plans to hunt on Saturday, April 19, 1996. 12. Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, believes that Plaintiff, Sandra K. Sheriff., sought the ex parte Order to interfere with Defendant's, Keith L. Sheriff, hunting plans. 13. Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, has temporarily moved into hi,J parents hOllse, and is no longer living with the Plaintiff. I 1,1~' l~, ~ 'II! _II "1 , \lP' ,t. ~I . 2 14. Defendant, Keit.h 1.. Shedff, has had nu contact with Plaint.iff Bince Tuesday, April 16, 1996, prior to the ent.ry of the protective order, on advise and agreement of. his counsel and Plaintiff's counsel. 15. Plaintif f, Sandra K. Shed f f, is not in any danger or any reasonable fear of danger of abuse from Defendant. 16. A heat'ing is scheduled f.Ot Monday, Apd 1 29, 1996, before the Honorable Kevin A. Hess fOl' the pt"ot.ect.ion from abuse petition. 17. Defendant's hunting guns were taken by the Sheriff of Cumberland county on April 19, 1996, when Defendant was served with the protect.ion from Abuse Order. 18. Although Defendant owns several guns, he specifically hunts Spring turkey with his Winchester 1200 12 gauge L726352 shotgun. 19. Defendant, Keith L. Sherif.f, seeks an Order of Court returning his Winchester 1200 12 gauge 1.7:.16352 shotgun by Friday, April 26, 1996, so that he can continue his plans t.o hunt Saturday, April 27. 1996. 20. Plaint if f' s counsel was been served with a copy of this Petition, via facsimile, on Aprii 23, 1996. WHEREFORE. Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff. respecrfully requests Your Honorable Court to enter an order of court either: 1) vacating the Crdey." of C0urt dated Apri 1 19, 1996; 21 modifying the Order of Court dated April 19, 1996, ftllowing Defendant to retrieve his Winchester 1200 12 gauge , I>"',,~ 1 'III fill 1'1 11 r. ,I' . I \ J L726352 shotgun from the Cumbel'lnnd County Shel'.i.H I or 3) schedule a hearing on 01' before Aprll 26, 1996. Respectfully submitted, J~~ ~\~t...oq"rr. Attorney :m No. 65208 HANFT & VOHS 11 West Pomfret Street, Suite 2 Carlisle. PA 1."/013 (7171 249-5373 I' 1/1\'1)"1' al","I)ll'l'If,"1(,~ ~~_. 4 EXHI.BI.T "A" I. , PI\'I""I'''~H1''I''''''tl"llON ~'" 6 , I;, I , The defendant is ordered 10 refrain from having any direct or indirect contact with the plaintiff and her minor child including, bUI not limited to, telephone and written communications. The defendant is enjoined from harassing and stalking the plaintiff and from harassing her relalives, and Ihe minor child. The defendant is enjoined from entering the plaintiffs place of employment and the day care facility of the plaintiffs minor child. The defendant is enjoined from removing, damaging, destroying or selling any property owned jointly by the parties or owned solely by the plaintiff. The defendanl is ordered to relinquish to the sheriffs department any weapons which he owns, possesses, has used or Ihreatened to use against the plaintiff and her minor child, and the defendant is prohibited from acquiring or possessing any weapons for the duration of this Order. A violation of this Order may subject the defendant to: i) arrest under 23 Pa.C.S. 16113; iI) a private criminal complaint under 23 Pa.C.S. 16113.1; iii) a charge of indirect criminal contempt under 23 Pa.C.S. ~6114, punishable by imprisonment up to six months and a fine of 5100.00-$1,000.00; and Iv) civil contempt under 23 Pa.C.S. 16114.1. Resumption of co-residence on the part of the plaintiff and defendant shall not nullify the provisions of the court order. This Order shall remain in effect until modified or terminated by the Court and can be extended beyond its original expiration date if Ihe Court finds thatlhe defendant has commilled an act of abuse or has engaged in a pattern or practice that indicates risk of harm to the plaintiff or her minor child. _.A EXHIBIT "B" 'jll\l"I'~"~tl.IW'lI"tn:tl"'rA 7 1, \ 1 I :, " " I, It ,> 11< " I" Iii. :t a. Denied. Defendant specifically denies the allegations in this p<u'a,Jra(1h. On April 13, 1996, Defendant's friend gave him instructions on how to contact an attorney to file divorce, not to kill his wife. In addition, Defendant specifically denies pushing Plaintiff; rather, as soon as Defendant's friend dropped him off at the marital residence, Plaintiff began yelling at Defendant, Defendant did not even speak to Plaintiff due to her extreme emotional state of mind. plaintiff became frustrated that Defendant would not engage in an argument with Plaintiff. and Plaintiff proceeded to pour a can of beer over Defendant's head. After this provocation, Defendant did pour R can of beer over her head, but then he put it in the sink. Defendant specifically denies throwing the can or any object at Plaintiff. b. Deni~d. Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragraph. Defendant has never pushed Plaintiff onto the bed and demanded sexual intercourse from Plaintiff. Further, Defendant has never attempted to commit spousal rape with Plaintiff. c. Denied. Defendil.nt speci f ically denies pushing or Showing Plaintif f ot' her minor child. He has never pushed or harm the minor child. Defendant ndmits that he has in self defense pushed Plaintiff away from him when she is attacking hlm, kicking him in the genitals, ,. J\j\i,',"' I ',IlHI'I'l'\~~WI'.I'I^ 2 slapping ot' hitting Defendant, and pulling at Defendant's hair. d. Denied. Defendant specifically denies PUshing or showing Plaintiff or het' minor child. He has never pushed or harm the minor child. Defendant admits that he has in st!!lf defense pushed Plaintiff away from him when she is attacking him, kicking him in the genitals, Slapping or hitting Defendant, and pulling at Defendant's hail'. By way of further response, Pl~intiff hit Defendant on December 22, 1995, as Soon as he entered the residence, without any notice or provacation. e. Denied. Defendant specically denies pushing or showing Plaintiff or her minor child. He has never I " i , i , r I pushed or harm the minor child. Defendant admits that he has in self defense pushed Plaintiff away from him when she is attacking him, kiCking him in the genitals, Slapping or hitting Defendant, and PUlling at Defendant's hair. showing Plaintiff or her minor child. He has never f. Denied. Defendant specically denies pushing or pushed or harm the minor child. Defendant admits that he haS in self def~nse pushed Plaintiff away from him slapping or hitting Defendant, and pulling at when she is attacking him, kiCking him in thB genitals, Defendant's hair, Further, Defendant has never I' 'n1~, '.' 'I' ,\I!lIII~V',..r,~ \\'~ ~ p~ \ ] . , demanded sexual intercourse or attempted Lo rape Plaintlff. 5. Denied. The Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. 6. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant ~pecifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant, 7. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. e, Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the <lllegations of this paragragh. and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. 9. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response in require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at tdal, if relevant, 1'1"'''1<111.1'<(11,',>'.'\\'1''1'1',\ 4 10. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To tne extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demande~ at trial, if relevant. B. EXCLUSIVE POSSESION 11. Denied. Defendant denies that he l.~ft the marital residence voluntarily. Rather, Plaintiff demanded that Defendant leave the marital house, and Plaintiff changed the locks to the marital residence preventing Defendant from returning to his home. 12. Denied. Plaintiff's parents live ten (10) minutes away, and they have ample room for Plaintiff and her minor child. . 13. Denied. The allegation i:;; thil, paragragh are conclusions of law to which to reSpOnElC is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. In addition, Plaintiff quit her job at as Electric. and therefore cannot afford to continue to live in the marital residence. 14. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is d~mRnded at I, , (, f~' l' '1l.~III' ,\';'\\'10 II 1'1 ~ 5 -' trial, if relevant. In addition, Plaintiff can live with her parents, just ten (10) minutes from the marital residence. C. SUPPOR'r 15. Denied. The allegation io thio paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. In addition, due to Plaint iff's mari tal misconduct, including but not limited to adultery. Plaintiff is not entitled to support. Since the O~der of Court d~ted April 19, 1996, Plaintiff' s paramou~' has either been residing in thl? marital residence with Plaintiff, or he has been spending large amounts of time at the marital residence with Plaintiff. This man, Cloyd Barrick. is married to another woman, yet continues to maintain a sexual relationship with Plaintiff, In addition, Plaintiff has access to over $3,000.0U in n bank account that is available for her to support herself. 16. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a l'esponse is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. 17. Ammited in part, and denied in part. Defendant admits being employed at John Gliem, Inc., but Defendant denies that he earns $35,000. Rather, Defendant carns $13.25 per hour, or $27,560 gross annually. j IlI\', '1,1, 1111 ~In ~"~~I" j'''" 6 18. lJemied. The allegation is this paragr'agh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. 19. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary, To the extent a response io require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant, D. ATTORNEYS FEES 20. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is d~manded at trial, if relevant. Further, Defendant has retained private counsel to defend this meritless protection from abuse petition, and to prosecute a divorce so that he can separate his life from Plaintiff due to her marital misconduct. He has and will continue to incur substantial legal fees as a result of Plaintiff's meritless claims that have been brought solely to gain a legal advantage in the pending divorce matter since Plaintiff has not incur any legal fees or costs, and will continue to receive free legal assistance. ~ l'I")~L'~,,~II~~Jl'l'AN~\\U I'~~ '7 , .. . . . I I CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 24th day of April, 1996, I, William C. Vohs, Esquire, hereby certify that I have this day served the following person with a copy of the foregoing document, by depositing same in the United States Mail, First Class. Postage Prepaid, and ~y facsimile addressed as follows: Legal Services, Inc. 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, PA 17013 FAX (717) 243-8026 ~ c~~~\qu1" Attorney ID No. 65208 HANFT & VOHS 11 West Pomfret Street, Suite 2 Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-5373 ~ 1':\0'0" "'Il.~I"'''''''W1'~ tl',\ 10 - ( ~, C III ~ I I ill I " . (".<<1: O~ ~ ~ (OJ ~~ ~ ~ ,.., 0 0.1/) ~ ~ :z: 01 ~~ .; O~ . ~ ~ ~ ti '" 0 > tc li'li <<I: ... +> .... ~~ ~ ti (".~ ..:t ("..,; ,.., (".>J cJffi > ,..,c:: Os ,.., ""'; . ,.., Q) ~1i! C,) m~ > "'... Z~ fiJ2l d ~~ U'l g .,. I/) CC Iii ..... . :z: ~ N :.: . z ~ I ..:t 0 - ~gj ~ ~ ,.., - .~ Eo< ~~ i=l ,.., . ,.., !;:; :9. "-l :.: 0. . . . . . . .... . , ...... ' IN THE COURT Of' COMMON PI,EAS OF CUMBERLAND COtrnTY, PENNSYLVANIA SANDRA K. SHERIFF, Plaintiff CIVIL ACTION '. LAW v. , KEITH L. SHERIFF, Defendant NO. 96-2145 .P.nI.TION TO VACATB OR MODIFY ORDBR AND NOW, this 24th day of April, 1996, comes Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, by and through his attorneys, HANFT & VOHS, and files the following Petition to Vacate or Modify the Protection from Abuse Ordel', dated April 19, 1996, and in support thereof avers as follows: 1. The Defendant is Keith L. Sheriff, who currently resides at 395 Opossum f.,ake R.oad, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. The Plaintiff is Sandra K. Sheriff, who currently resides at 6 Mountain View Drive, Mount Holly Springs, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. The Plaintiff and Defendant are husband and wife 4. The parties w.!re married on May 13, 1995. ill Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 5. Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, filed a Complaint in Divorce at 96-2148 Civil Term, on April 19, 1996, at 3:58 p.m. 6. Plaintiff, Sandra K. Sheriff, filed a petition for Protective Order at 96-2145 Civil Term, on April 19, 1996, just ~ llt\ill~l-' MII'~1l~"1'I'ml1 "4 "I. 1 minutes prior to the filing of the Divorce Complaint. 7. Defendant's, Keith L. Sheriff, counsel had previously contacted Plaintiff's, Sandra K. Sheriff's, counsel to inquire into whether Plaintiff was seeking an ex parte protection Order, and requested that Plaintiff's counsel contact the undersigned when the Court was approached for t.he ex parte Order so that both parties' counsel may be heard from the Court. a. Plaintiff's, Sandra K. Sheriff, counsel however did not contact the undersigned, and a result of which a temporary protection order was entered on April 19, 1996. A true and correct copy of the Order of Court dated April 19. 1996, is attached hereto and made a part hereof and marked as Exhibit "A". 9. Defenant, Keith L. Sheriff, has filed an Answer thereto, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof and marked as Exhibit "B". 10. Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, desires that the Order of Court dated April 19, 1996, either be vacated, or modified, to allow Defendant the opportunity to hunt Saturday, April 27, 1996, for the Spring turk~y season. 11. Plaintiff, Sandra K. Sheriff, knew that Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, had plans to hunt on Saturday, April 19, 1996. 12. Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, believes that Plaintiff, Sandra K. Sheriff, sought the ex parte Order to interfere with Defendant's, Keith L. Sheriff, hunting plans. 13. Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, has temporarily moved into hiH parents house, clnd is no longer living with the Plaintiff. ~ I\.\""L'~ 1U1'Hrrl'I'lrnlh'I.~h' 2 14. Defendant., Keit.h L. Sheriff, has had no cOllta(,t with Plaintiff since Tuesday, April 16, 1996, prior to t.he entry of the protective order, on advise and agreement of his counsel and Plaintiff's counsel. 15. Plaintiff, Sandra K. Sheriff, is not in any danger or any reasonable fear of danger of abuse from Defendant. 16. A hearing is scheduled for Monday, April 29, 1996, before the Honorable Kevin A. Hess for the protection from abuse petition. 17. Defendant's hunting guns were taken by the Sheriff of Cumberland County on April 19, 1996, when Defendant was served with the Protection from Abuse Order. 18. Although Defendant owns several guns, he specifically hunts Spring turkey with his Winchester 1200 12 gauge L726352 shotgun. 19. Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, seeks an Order of Court returning his Winchester 1200 12 gauge L726352 shotgun by Friday, April 26, 1996, so that he can continue his plans to hunt Saturday, Apri.l 27, 1996. 20. Plaintiff's counsel was been served with a copy of this Petition, via facsi.mile, on April 23, 1996. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, respectfully requests Your Honorable Court to enter an order of court either: 1) vacating the Order of Court dated April 19, 1996; ~) modifying the Order of Court dated April 19, 1996, allowing Defendant to retrieve his Winchester 1200 12 gauge I' 'U1V"~' I ~1I1 ~IH'I'1111'<,N "I' \ 3 EXHIBIT "A" , , I 'nt\'lltlr11',..IIIJI...,.l'ltmll.....M 6 ....... The defendant is ordered to refrain from having any direct or indirect contact with the plaintiff and her minor child including, but not limited to, telephone and written communications. The defendant is enjoined from harassing and stalking the plaintiff and from harassing her relatives, and the minor child. The defendant is enjoined from entering the plaintiffs place of employment and the day care facility of the plaintiffs minor child. The defendant is enjoined from removing, damaging, destroying or selling any property owned jointly by the parties or owned solely by the plaintiff. The defendant is ordered to relinquish to the sheriffs department any weapons which he owns, possesses, has used or threatened to use against the plaintiff and her minor child, and Ihe defendant is prohibited from acquiring or possessing any weapons for the duration of this Order. A violation of this Order may subject the defendant to: i) arrest under 23 Pa.C.S. 16113; II) a private criminal complaint under 23 Pa.C.S. 16113.1; iii) a charge of indirect criminal contempt under 23 Pa.C.S. 16114, punishable by Imprisonment up to six months and a nne of $100.00-$1,000.00; and Iv) civil contempt under 23 Pa.C.S. 16114.1. Resumption ot' co-residence on the part of the plaintiff and defendant shall not nulllfy the provisions of the court order. This Order shall remain in effect until modified or terminated by the Court and can be eXlended beyond ils original expiration date if the Court finds that the defendant has committed an act of abuse or has engaged in a pattem or practice that indicates risk of harm to the plaintiff or her minor child. a. Denied. Defendant specifically denies the allegations in this paraHraph. On April 13, 1996, Defendant's friend gave him instructions on how to contact an attorney to file divorce, not to kill his wife. In addition, Defendant specifically denies pushing Plaintiff, rather, as soon as Defendant's friend dropped him off at the marital residence, Plaintiff began yelling at Defendant, Defendant did not even speak to Plaintiff due to her extreme emotional state of mind. Plaintiff became frustrated that Defendant would not engage in an argument with Plaintiff, and Plaintiff proceeded to pour a can of beer over Defendant's head. After this provocation, Defendant did pour i1 can of beer over her head, but then he put it in the sink. Defendant specifically denies throwing the can or any object at Plaintiff. b. Deni~d. Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragraph. Defendant has never pushed Plaintiff onto the bed and demanded sexual intercourse from Plaintiff. Further, Defendant has never attempted to commit spousal rape with Plaintiff. c. Denied. Defendant specifically denies pushing or Showing Plaintiff or her minor child. lie has never pushed or harm the minor child. Defendant admits that he has in self defense pushed Plaintiff away from him when she is attacking him, kiCking him in the genitals, ~ 'Ih\"'~" :,111 ~Ifil' 1'1~""'I,1l 1'1-1 2 slapping or hitting Defendant, and pulling at Defendant's hair. d. Denied. Defendant Bpecifi~ally denies pushing or showing Plaintiff or her minor child. He has never pushed or harm the minor child. Defendant admits that he has in self defense pushed Plaintiff away from him when she is attacking him, kicking him in the genitals, slapping or hitting Defendant, and pUlling at Defendant's hair. By way of further response, Pl~intiff hit Defendant on December 22, 1995, as soon as he entered the residence, without any notice or provacation. e. Denied. Defendant specically denies pushing or showing Plaintiff or her minor child. He has never pushed or harm the minor child. Defendant admits that he has in self defense pushed Plaintiff away from him when she is attacking him, kicking him in the genitals, slapping or hitting Defendant, and pulling at Defendant's hair. f. Denied. Defendant specically denies pushing or showing Plaintif f or her minor child. He has never pUShed or harm the minor child. Defendant admits that he has in self defense pushed Plaintiff away from him when she is attacking him, kicking him in the genitals, slapping or hitting Defendant, and pulling at Defendant's hair. Further, Defendant h~s never t' 1.'1'., '" 1"',''''''UYAr.-o'.\'j,~ .'.,\ 3 ...,. demandt'd 8('XllaJ lntel'course 01' uttempt.ed t.o rape Plaintiff. 5. Denied. The Defendant specifically denies th~ allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. 6. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of. law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. 7. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. 8. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of. law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. 9. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require. Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. .1)1\""" ,1'11'111"',"1',"1'1' 4 10. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. E. EXCLUSIVE POSSESION 11. Denied. Defendant denies that he left the marital residence voluntarily. Rather, Plaintiff demanded that Defendant leave the marital house, and Plaintiff changed the locks to the marital residence preventing Defendant from returning to his home. 12. Denied. Plaintiff's parents live ten (10) minutes away, and they have ample room for Plaintiff and her minor child. . 13 . Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to respon!1e is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. In addition, Plaintiff quit her job at GS Electric, and therefore cannot afford to continue to live in the marital residence. 14. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at I' ','I.' ,~, ~- '1111' '11' .\~;nv'l ~ 1'\' \ 5 .. trial, if relevant. In addition. Plaintiff can live with her parents, just ten (10) minutes from the marital residence. C. SUPPORT 15. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. In addition, due to Plaintiff's marital misconduct, including but not limited to adultery, Plaintiff is not entitled to support. Since the Order of Court dated April 19, 1996, Plaintiff's paramour has either been residing in the marital residence with Plaintiff, or he has been spending large amounts of time at the marital residence with Plaintiff. This man, Cloyd Barrick, is married to another woman, yet continues to maintain a sexual relationship with Plaintiff. In addition, Plaintiff has access to over $3,600.00 in a bank account that is available for her to support herself. 16. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require. Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. 17. Ammited in part, and denied in part. Defendant admits being employed at John Gliem, Inc., but Defendant denies that he earns $35,000. Rather, Defendant earns $13.25 per hour, or $27,560 gross annually. I "1\. '~, I-' ~III ~11l-' .....~w,,~ ~~~ 6 -~ 18. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh arc conclu~ionB of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. 19. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. D. ATTORNEYS FEES 20. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is domanded at trial, if relevant. Further, Defendant has retained private counsel to defend this meritless protection from abuse petition, and to prosecute a divorce so that he can separate his life from Plaintiff due to her marital misconduct. He has and will continue to incur substantial legal fees as a result of Plaintiff's meritless claims that have been brought solely to gain a legal advantage in the pending divorce matter since Plaintiff has not incur any legal fees or costs, and will continue to receive free legal assistance. , l~">fl, V,'IIJl~II'l''''!'o~~'I" 1'1''\ '7 WHEREFORB, Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, respectfully requests Your Honorable Court to vacate the Order of Court dated April 19, 1996, and award Defendant reasonable attorneys fees. Respectfully submitted, HANFT & VOHS L-' W 11 am C. Vohs, Esquire Attorney ID No. 65208 11 West Pomfret Street, Suite 2 Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-5373 " " I: I" I' Ut\'J"('II'ItIJoM.tl'J\hw..I'JIIn~ a , . .-,J~ , . minutes prior to the filing of the Divorce Complaint, 7. Defendant's, Keith L. Sheriff. counsel had previously contacted Plaintiff's, Sandra K, Sheriff's, counsel to inquire into whether Plaintiff was seeking an ex parte protection Order, and requested that Plaintiff's counsel contact the undersigned when the Court was approached for the ex parte Order so that both part iee' counsel may be heard from the Court, 8. Plaintiff's, Sandra K. Sheriff, counsel however did not contact the undersigned, and a result of which a temporary protection order was entered on April 19, 1996. A true and correct copy of the Order of Court dated April 19, 1996, is attached hereto and made a part hereof and marked as Exhibit nAn. 9. Defenant, Keith L. Shedff, has filed an Answer thereto, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof and marked as Exhibit nBn. 10. Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, desires that the, Order of Court dated April 19, 1996, either be vacated, or modified, to allow Defendant the opportunity to hunt Saturday, April 27, 1996, for the Spring turkey season. 11. Plaintiff, Sandra K. Sheriff, knew that Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, had plans to hunt on Satuz'day, April 19, 1996. 12. Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, beli-:ves that Plaintiff, Sandra K, Sheriff, sought the ex parte Order to interfere with Defendant's, Keith L. Sheriff, hunting plans, 13. Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, has temporarily moved into hi,] pal:ents house, <lOd is no longer living with the Plaintiff, ~ "ll, l~ 1'1' JIU M III' J'I'IlI~' ,'. II .. 2 14. Defendant, Keith L. Shel'iff, has had no COllti.ct with Plaintiff since Tuesday, April 16, 1996, prior to the entry of the protective order, on advise and agreement of his counsel and Plaintiff's counsel. 15. Plaintiff, Sandra K. Sheriff, is not in any danger or any reasonable fear of danger of abuse from Defendant. 16. A hearing is scheduled for Monday, April 29, 1996, before the Honorable Kevin A. Hess for the protection from abuse petition. 17. Defendant's hunting guns were taken by the Sheriff of Cumberland County on April 19, 1996, when Defendant was served with the Protection from Abuse Order. 18. Although Defendant owns several guns, he specifically hunts Spring turkey with his Winchester 1200 12 gauge L726352 shotgun. 19. Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, seeks an Order of Court returning his Winchester 1200 12 gauge L726352 shotgun by Friday, Apri 1 26, 1996, so that he can cont inue his plans to hunt Saturday, April 27, 1996. 20. Plaintiff's counsel was been served with a copy of this Petition, via facsimile, on April 23, 1996. WHEREFORE, Defendant. Keith L. Sheriff, respecrfuLly requests Your Honorable Court to enter an order of court either: 1) vacating the Order of Court dated April 19, 1996; 2) modifying the Order of Court dated April 19, 1996, allowing Defendant to retrieve his Winchester 1200 12 gauge '.1," ",'.H1I'IH'I'111I,',I!'I'\ J The defendanl is ordered 10 refrain from having any direct or indirect contact with the plaintiff and her minor child including, but not limited to, lelephone and written communications. The defendant is enjoined from harassing and stalking the plaintiff and from harassing her relatives, and the minor child. The defendant is enjoined from entering the plaintiffs place of employment and the day care facility of the plaintiff's minor child, The defendant is enjoined from removing, damaging, destroying or selling any property owned jointly by Ihe parties or owned solely by the plaintiff. The defendant is ordered to relinquish 10 the sheriffs department any weapons which he owns, possesses, has used or threatened to use against the plaintiff and her minor child, and the defendant is prohibited from acquiring or possessing any weapons for the duration of this Order. A violation of tbis Order may subject the defendant to: i) arrest under 23 Pa.C.S. 16113; Ii) a private criminal complaint under 23 Pa.C.S. ~6113.1; Iii) a charge of indirect criminal contempt und~r 23 Pa.C.S. ~6114, punishable by imprisonment up to six months and a fine of $JOO.OO-$I,ooo.OO: and iv) civil contempt under 23 Pa.C.S. ~61l4.I. Resumption of co-residence on the part of the plaintiff and defendant shall not nullify the provisions of the court order. This Order shall remain in effect until modified or terminated by the Court and can be extended beyond its original expiration date if the Court finds that the defendanl has committed an act of abuse or has engaged in a pattern or practice that indicates risk of harm to the plaintiff or her minor child. a. Denied. Defendant specifically denies the allegations in this para~Jr.aph. On April 1], 1996, Defendant's friend gave hi.m instructions on how to contact an attorney to file divorce, not to kill his wife. In addition, Defendant sped f ically denies pushing Plaintiff; rather, as Boon as Defendant's friend dropped him off at the marital residence, Plaintiff begilll yelling <it Defendant, Defend,~nt did not even speak to Plaintiff due to her extreme emotional state of mind. Plaintiff became frustrated that Defendant would not engage in an argument wi t.h Plaintiff, and Plaintiff proceeded to pour Q can of beer over Defendant's head. After this provocation, Defendant did pour a can of beer over her head, but t~en he put it in the sink. Defendant specifically denies throwing the can or any object at Plaintiff. b. Denied. Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragraph. Defendant has never pushed Plaintiff onto the bed and demanded sexual intercourse from Plaintiff. Further, Defendant has never attempted to commit spousal rape with Plaintiff. c. Denied. Defendant specifically denies pushing or showing Plaintiff or her minor child. lIe has never pushed or harm the minor child. Defendant admits that he has in self defense pu~hnd Plaintiff away from him when she is attacking him, kicking him in the genitals, ~ 1"\' ~, 1 -.Ill' 11'1'1 \ \~j,""l, ~ 1'1 " 2 slapping or hitting Defendant, and pulling at Defendant's hair. d. Denied. Defendant specifically denies pushing or showing Plaintiff or her minor child. He has never pushed or harm the minor child. Defendant admits that he has in self defense pushed Plaintiff away from him when she is attacking him, kicking him in the genitals, slapping or hitting Defendant, and pUlling at Defendant's hair. By way of further response, Plaintiff hit Defendant on December 22, 1995, as soon as he entered the residence, without any notice or provacation. e. Denied. Defendant specically denies pushing or showing Plaintiff or her minor child. He has never pushed or harm the minor child. Defendant admits that he has in self defense pushed Plaintiff away from him when she is attacking him, kicking him in the genitals, slapping or hitting Defendant, and pulling at Defendant's hair. f. Denied. Defendant specically denIes pushing or showing Plaintiff or her minor child. He has never pushed or harm the minor child. Defendant admits that he has in self defense pushed Plaintiff away from him when she is attacking him, kicking him in the genitals, siapping or hitting Defendant, and pulling at" Defendant's hair. Further, Defp~dant has never I /'1', ',I' \!lI' 1'11'1'.",'1 ,\'1' ~ 1'1' \ 1 .-.J} trial, if relevant. In addition, Plaintiff can live with her parents, just ten (10) minutes from the marital residence. C. SUPPORT 15. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. In addition, due to Plaintiff's marital misconduct, including but not limited to adultery, Plaintiff is not entitled to suppor.t. Since the Order. of Court d~ted April 19, 1996, Plaintiff's paramour has either been residing in th~ marital residence with Plaintiff, or he has been spending large amounts of time at the marital residence with Plaintiff. This man, Cloyd Barrick, is married to another woman, yet continues to, maintain a sexual relationship with Plaintiff. In addition, plaintiff has access to over $3,(jOO. 00 in a bank account that is available for her to support herself. 16. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the , 1 i I allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. 17. JI.mmited in part, and denied in part. Defendant admits being employed at John Gliem, Inc., but Defendant denies that he earns $35,000, Rather, Defendant earns $13.25 per hour, or I $27,560 gross annually. I I' I' Ill" 'I,' ~ '1"".II"'^-"~\nM PI'" 6 18. DeniEld. The allegat.ion if! this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. 19. Denied. The allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies tl~ allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. D. ATTORNEYS FEES 20. Denied. 'l'he allegation is this paragragh are conclusions of law to which to response is necessary. To the extent a response is require, Defendant specifically denies the allegations of this paragragh, and strict proof is demanded at trial, if relevant. Further, Defendant has retained private counsel to defend this meritless protection from abuse petition, and to prosecute a divorce so that he can separate his life from Plaintiff due to her marital misconduct. He has and will continue to incur substantial legal fees as a result of Plaintiff's meritless claims that have been brought solely to ~ i gain a legal advantage in the pending divorce matter since Plaintiff has not incur any legal fees or costs, and will continue to receive free legal assistance. I I', ~ 1>1'('~"~~'IIHlll','r.~\\'lkl'h.. '7 i' ~. , , , , , I 'I I I' ! r I I N 4) '5 tIl l ,~tIl r,., v, lU - ~~ ~ , :> 0 <( alli:l.=. jr~ 'ij =u .' }, ~ '.1 , " <>1,. '" , j\ ~ :...",\ , . ~ ~ r " ' ^J ~ ..~ :;, I/i ~ ~ S ~ ~ ..J " .. ~ ( -: cU . '/I 0. > ~ oj ~ ~ z ~ .. ~ . e 1- J ~ ~ ~ " ( -: I.. ,.. ~ ~ : CJ " , " ", 'f'l ;',' 'f',t I' 1 , \ ",I.. .1 ~ ,., "t' , , ':(" , ~.A ' , " " i II 'I, ~ , i ' , I . Ii , ~ ~ 1', . t .' .J , , .. I I I, ;, Ii, I , I,' -- . '11~1 il( '. , I.aw OUk", SAlOIS, GUIDO, SHUFF & MASLAND 'I',"elll \\lnr-.t\1 (1)"I'nlt\llll~ lohn E, SlIke Rohert C, Saidis F.dwllrd E, (juido Geoffrey S, Shull Alherlll, Ma,lan<l lohnna I, Deily Richnrd p, Mj,lil,ky SCOIt 0, Moore 2(') West Uigh Succi' Pu'" Otfil.'l' BtI\ )60 Carll. I.. Pennsylvania 17111.\ Telephone, (717) 2,1],6222' Fae,illlilc, (717) H,\.MHIl W.'I Nhol'\! Orne.: 211}l} MllrkcI Street C'wnpll;lI. PA 17011 Telel'hnne, (717) 7J7,)405 I'nt'lonil" (717) 7J7,.1407 R.ply 1iJ C.rll8l. July 1, 1996 William C. Vohs, Esquire 11 West Pomfret Street, Suite 2 Carlisle, PA 17013 Re: Sheriff v. Sheriff Dear Chuck: Sandy Sheriff and I sat down to review your proposal in your letter of June 17, 1996. I understand your client's concern that she refinance or sell the home within one year; however, because she has only been working part-time, she may need a year to two years to establish a work history in order to refinance. She will agree to have him deed over the property to the house on the condition that she attempts to refinance within 24 months from the date of the Agreement, or she will list the house for sale to remove his name from the property. If she can refinance before that ti.me, she will; she certainly wants to, especially if she would be able to deal with the local lender and possibly reduce her mortgage payments. In exchange for him allowing her the additional year to refinance, 6he does agree to drop the Protection from Abuse Order so that your client can have his hunting equipment returned to him immediately. If you are preparing the Property Settlement and Separation Agreement, I would just ask that you add a paragraph to the standard agreement which would reflect the same language as in the Protection from Abuse. Sandy will return the dehumidifier, the chest of drawers and the piggy bank to your client. He may make arrangements to pick these items up along with his other personal property, through his father. Hopefully, this can be accomplished on a week that would suit both parties' schedule. She will have his items bOKed up and put in the basement so that all that has to be done is his father picking up his property. -- . , . William C. Vohs, Esquire July 1, 1996 Page Two At the same time, she would like to have returned to her the new fishing pole that they plu'chilsed tot' Cill1llda, the sump pump and the black hose that your c 1 It>,nt , II ht'othet' was us ing, and the camouflage backpack that belonga to [,lndflay, Plealle advise if you see any difficulty in having th(!fHl It.nmn I'et.umed to her. Finally, my client has not heen rlJc'mtilctmi hy the Game Commission. Hopefully, they would agree to dn>p the charges and not pureue it any fUt'ther, 110 neith.'!l' pill't y would have to testify. If. for flome "eaSOll, they ('ont.wl, h"t' to Ilee if thf! charges should be dropped, uhf] woul<i L'on.dllly ""I""," to thi<3 being accomplished, After you have had the opportunity to draft a Property Settlement and Separation, plealle tot'w,ud lt on to me for my review. I f you wiah fat' me to dt'a t t the Agt'eement, let me know immediately and I will do aD. I will alllo be preparing a Deed for your client to execute slmultaneoulIly to tranBter his interest in the marital property, Again, I thank you for YOlU' (,oopHal ion in t.his matter. Very truly yours, J.7D/rlm. ee: Sandy Sheriff SAlOIS, OUIOO, SHUFF & MASLAND ,r~:) i\~~t~eir" f.l~l(/ ~~v I I I , . . . ~ Low OUkes SAlOIS, GUIDO, SHun' & MASLAND PLAlNTlfPS E)(HJBrr John E, Slike Robert C, Saidi. f.dward Il, Guido Oeorrrey S, Shurr Albert It, Mudand Johnna J, Deily Richard p, Mhlil.ky SCOIl D, Moore David J, Freed It PM,OHHIONAL O)MPORAlION 26 WeSllli~h Slreet . Pust Office Dux 560 eM.lbl., Penn.ylunla 17013 relephone: (717) 243,6222, Fllcsimile: (717) 243.6486 I August 20, 1996 W"t Shore om.., 2109 Markel Stre<1 Camp Hill, PA 17011 Telephone: (717) 737.341)5 FIlt.lmJle: (717) 737.3407 Reply To CarU.I. William C. Vohs, Esquire 11 West Pomfret Street, Suite 2 Carlisle, PA 17013 Re: Sheriff v, Sheriff Dear Chuck: r+ I have had the opportunity to meet with Ms. Sheriff regarding some of the marital issues you and I had discussed. Initially, my client has by this time contacted Lucinda Sheaffer and is willing to drop the spousal support hearing currently scheduled for Monday, August 26 at 1,30 p.m, My client is also willing to make the exchange of the personal property on MOnday, August 26 at 7:00 p.m. Your client should bring with him the camouflaged backpack, the black hose and sump pump, the chimney cleaner that was made for the house. her new fishing pole and to return the keys to the house and the shed. In exchange for these items, my client will alldw him and his father, or whomever he chooses to bring along to help to remove all his personal property that has been stored in the basement since the parties' separation. It does not appear at this time that my client wants to try to keep the property, They have increased her mortgage payments from $628.00 to over $800,00, aod it is unsure whether this is a change in the escrow or what increased the payments, At this time she is trying to find out what the increase was, and no satisfactory information has been provided to her, Perhaps your client still wishes to deed the property over to her on the condition that she eIther refinances or lists this house for sale with a realtor in April of 1997, As there is little or no equity in the property anyway, and perhaps she could make a few dollars on the property, she would be willing to do this in exchange for her share of the $12,240,00 she removed from the parties' joint account from Farmers Trust. I questioned Ms. Sheriff regarding the IRS refund which is in the amount of $1,700.00, She placed this in the joint checking account and made mortgage payments with this money, She d - -- ,.., William c. Vohs, Esquire August 21, 1996 Page Two informs me that the accountant atated that if they filed jointly, they would get a $1,700.00 and lf they filed separately, my elient would receive $1,700,00 and your client would owe $600.00. You can verify this with the tax preparer if he so chooses. Your client needs to keep the health insurance coverage until the divorce has be~n finalized, or until my client is covered by her cmployer, whichever should occur sooner. She has made payments for doctors visits, and apparently the checks for reimbursement for these visits are going directly to your client. please have him verify these amounts and provide her with a check or payment fOl' the checks ho has cashed. Further, he was to provide her with a new proscription card he received in May, and she has not Ileen it YO':, Finally, I quefllioned my client about the Men's Health Book Service bill that IIhc received, Your client did order this and had it put in hiu name, and has had these books sent to his Mom and Dad's homo rather th<1lI at the house. The most recent bill that you forwarded to mo in the amount of $28.80 should be paid by your client immediately. As far as the sewer bill is concerned, my client is willing to pay the sewer payments tor as long as she is residing there; however, he must contact the Borough to have his name removed and my client will have the bills put in her name. Otherwise, they will continue to come Ln this name as he apparently made arrangements to remove her name from the bills. After you have had the opportunity to review this with your cl ient, please contact me. I also need you to provide me a copy of all of hia savingll and retirement plans with John Gleim Excavating to sce if there is any equitable distribution of these funds to pursue for the 11 month period the parties were together. Very truly yours, SAlOIS, GUIDO, SHUFF & MASLAND Johnna J. Deily JJO/rlm ec: Sandy Sheriff 6. The defendant is excluded from the plaintiff's residence located at , Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, except for the limited purpose of transferring custody during which times the defendant shall remain in his/her vehicle. 7. The defendant is ordered to stay away from the plaintiff's residence located at , Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, which the parties have never shared, except for the limited purpose of transferring custody during which times the defendant shall remain in his/her vehicle. 8. The defendant is ordered to stay away from any residence the plaintiff may in the future establish for herself/except for the limited purpose of transferring custody during which times the defendant shall remain in his/her vehicle. 9. The defendant is ordered to relinquish to the sheriff's department the following weapons which he owns, possesses or has used or threatened to use against the plaintiff and/or the minor child/ren: , and prohibiting the defendant from acquiring or possessing any other ~eapons for the duration of the Order. 10. The defendant is ordered to reimburse the plaintiff's out-of-pocket losses suffered as a result of the abuse including but not limited to the losses listed on the attached sheet marked Exhibit A. The first payment to be made by the defsndant on the date the Protection Order is entered in the above-captioned matter. The total amount of losses Sh8ll be reimbursed to the plaintiff within 60 days of the entry of this Order. 11. The defendant is ordered to pay support to the plaintiff and/or the minor child/ren in an appropriate amount according to the support guidelines (in the amount of $ per week) payable to the plaintiff in the form of a check or money order, mailed to hor residence, and ordering the defendant to provide health coverage to the spouse and/or minor child/ron, directing the defendant to pay all of tho unreimbursed medical expenses of the plaintiff (spouse) and/or minor child/ren of defendant to the provider or to the plaintiff when she has paid for the medical treatment and the defendant is directed to make or continue to make rent or mortgage payments on the residence of the plaintiff. 12. The defendant is ordered to reimburse the plaintiff's out-of-pocket losses suffered as a result of the abuse including but not limited to the losses listed on the attached sheet marked Exhibit A. 13. The defendant is ordered to pay reasonable attorney fees to Legal Services, Inc./The court costs and fees are wa i ved( if at t. fees dropped). 14. This Order shall remain in effect for a period of one year or until modified or terminated by the Court after notice or hearing and may be extended beyond its original expiration date if the Court finds that the defendant has committed another act of abuse or has engaged in a pattern or practice that indicates continued risk 0' harm to the plaintiff. 15. This Order may subject the defendant to: i) arrest under 23 Pa. C.S. 66113; ii) a private criminal complalnt under 23 Pa. e.s. 66113.1; 'ii) a charge of indirect crimine.l contempt " ("'1 I ".." II .. ( I t , I I . Ll,' I [, I I ( l i , ';1 '.'1 r.. .:: ~~ i~ ! ~~ ~ e-.8 ~o ~ 8~ N ~~ ~ E'O~ ci ~ t.l 7. ... ... ,., ., <: ,., '" H '" . '" '" H <>: gj Ul . ~ ~ ~ . ~ ..., ~ '0 5i .... ~ ... o 1l ~ ~ o ... ..., Q) '0 at) .., ., .,., 0" ... &~ . '" '" H ~ . >-1 ~ H ~ . '" fn ~ %"~M ~2~~ ~I 5iP'h 4(" Ii; ~ '" % ~ - - , ." 7. On April 24, 1996, the Defendant, Keith L. Slwrlff, filed a Petition to Vacate or Modify Order. 8. On May 8, 1996, after a hearing, the Honorable Kevin A. Hess entered a Proctective Order. 9. At the hearing and on the reeord, the Honorable Kevin A. Hess made reference to Defendant's, Keith L. Sheriff's, personal property, which is in the possession of Plaintiff, Sandra K. Sheriff, to wit that the Protective Order cannot be used to hold the Defendant's personal property hostage. 10. Since the date of that Order, the Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, has made numerous attempts through his counsel to have his personal belongings returned to him. Specifically, there have been three (3) arrangements made between the parties' eounsel for the exchange of personal property. However, Plaintiff, Sandra K. Sheriff, on each of these occaisons has refused to return Defendant's, Keith L. Sheriff's, personal property. 11. Defendant, Keith ,L. Sheriff, is an avid hunter. 12. As a result of the Protective Order that was issued, the Cumberland County Sheriff has taken possession of all of the Defendant's, Keith L. Sheriff's, hunting guns. 13. Plaintiff, Sandra K. Sheriff, has not been the vietim of any abuse or threat of abuse from Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff. 14. Plaintiff, Sandra K. Sheriff, has refused and eontinues to refuse to modify the Protective Order to date, with a reference to the conf iscation of Defendant's, Keith L. Sheriff's, C '1'111W1~~'NJH~.]~'-H .1t~Hll'I/\'" ".r.l' 111'1_1 4 hunting guns so that Defendant, Reith L. Sheriff, would be permitted to hunt during the 1996 hunting season. 15. Notwithstanding the directions of this Honorabll~ Court, the Plaintiff, Sandra K. Sheriff, has be utilizing the Protective Order to hold Defendant's, Keith L. Sheriff's, personal property in her possession without any legal right. 16. Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, has incurred legal fees in attempting to retrieve his personal property. WHEREFORE, Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, respectfully requests Your Honorable Court to enter an order of court either: 1) vaeating the Order of Court dated May 8, 1996; 2) modifying the Order of Court dated May 8, 1996, deleting referenee to Paragraph seven (7) and direeting Plaintiff, Sandra K. Sheriff to return Defendant's, Keith L. Sheriff's personal property to him; or 3) award Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, reasonable attorney's fees ineurred as a result of Plaintiff's, Sandra K. Sheriff's failure to allow Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, to retrieve his personal property and forcing Defendant, Keith L. Sheriff, to file this Petition. Respeetfully submitted, '~ L--. W laC. hs, Esqu re Attorney 10 No. 65200 HANFT , VOHS 11 West Pomfret Street, Su i te 2 Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-5373 ,.)ItlI1lI)l1C1Ull"'()"'.'''IIl''IW'''AI'')'IWI)I)~1I1' 5