HomeMy WebLinkAbout96-02868I
I
I I
i
I 1 I
II I1 '
1Y I r ?,
I
3 I
,.t y , 1 X11 I I
I 1
I I I
N '
S I I
I
I
I I ?I
11. i
h ? r I '
r
I'1
I 1
tl I? I r r
I
I r , 1„
' I 1
1
1
r I ,II.
1 ?
1
' I
1 I
1
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR., ; IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
PLAINTIFF ; CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V. ,
CHRISTY M. BUTALA,
MICHAEL BUTALA AND
PATRICIA BUTALA,
DEFENDANTS 96.2888 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: CUSTODY
AND NOW, this V9 day of September, 1997, IT IS ORDERED:
(1) The orders of July 29, 1996 and August 5, 1997, ARE VACATED and
replaced with this order.
(2) Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., and Christy M, Butala shall have shared legal
custody of their daughter, Abby L. Butala, born June 3, 1996.
(3) Abby L. Butala shall be with her mother and maternal grandparents except
when she Is with her father as follows:
(a) On alternating weekends from Friday evening at 5:00 p,m. until
Monday when he goes to work,
(b) Two other days during each week at times when he is not working.
On his current work schedule if he is working 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.:
from after work until 8:00 p.m, If he is working 2:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.:
from 9:00 a.m. until he goes to work. If these two days are back to
back: for overnight until he goes to work the next day.
(c) On the alternating holidays of New Year's Day, Easter, Memorial
Day, July 4th, Labor Day and Thanksgiving with the holidays alternating
each year,
(4) In addition:
(a) The Christmas holiday shall be divided into two segments from
December 24th at noon until December 26th at noon and from
December 26th at noon until December 28th at noon, The father having
the first segment for 1997 with the segments alternating each year.
(b) The father shall always have Abby on Father's Day and the mother
shall always have Mother's Day.
(5) The parties shall cooperate In adjusting the pick up and delivery times on
this schedule as may be necessary to facilitate their work schedules.
By the Cc;
Edgar IT. Bayley, J.
Harold S. Irwin, III, Esquire
For the Father
Kathleen C. Daley, Esquire
For the Mother
:sea
r 1
i r I r 1 y
1: IN
I r. 11=
I
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
CHRISTY M. BUTALA,
MICHAEL BUTALA AND
PATRICIA BUTALA,
DEFENDANTS 98-2888 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: CUSTODY
BAYLEY, J., September 23,1997:-
Stephen R, Sensenich, Jr., age 24, and Christy Butala, age 22, are the parents
of Abby L. Butala, age 2, born June 3, 1995. Neither parent has married. The father
lives In the home of his parents In which his sister also resides In Bolling Springs.
The mother lives with her fiancee, James Brenner, their five and one-half year old son
Michael Brenner, and a male friend of her fiancee, in Linglestown., Abby lives In the
home of her maternal grandparents, Michael Butala and Patricia Butala, In Camp Hill.
The father is a meat cutter at Karns Food in Boiling Springs where he has
worked for six years. He works shifts of either 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p,m, or 2;00 p.m. to
10:00 p.m. five days a week. The days vary although he rarely works on Sunday. He
work most Saturdays. The mother is a swing manager at a McDonalds restaurant.
She works 38 to 48 hours a week on an irregular schedule of 4:45 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.
or later, or 3:30 p.m. to midnight or later,
1. The home is owned by Brenner's mother who does not live there.
W2888 CIVIL TERM
The mother and father began seeing each other while in college around the
beginning of 1994. They broke up In September, 1994, at a time when the mother
did not know she was pregnant. The mother told the father of her pregnancy In
October, 1994, but the father did not believe that the child was his. When Abby was
bom, the mother was living In the home of her parents in Camp Hill. The mother
instituted support proceedings against the father, Blood tests were obtained which
convinced the father that Abby was his child.' The father began seeing Abby in
January, 1996. The initial contact between the father and his daughter developed into
seeing each other every other weekend and occasionally some other days. On May
24, 1998, the father filed a complaint for partial physical custody of Abby. On July 29,
1998, a consent order was entered that provided both parents with shared legal
custody and the mother with primary physical custody of Abby, The father's periods
of temporary physical custody were:
On alternating weekends from Friday at 5:00 p.m. until Sunday at 5:00
p.m. Additionally, on those other weekends when Father is available
and the parties can agree, Mother will provide Father with periods of
additional temporary custody with the minor child.
Alternating holidays to include New Year's Day, Easter, Memorial Day,
July 4th, Labor Day and Thanksgiving. The Father shall have custody of
the minor child In odd numbered years for New Year's, Memorial Day
and Labor Day, with the Mother having custody of the minor child in odd
numbered years on Easter, July 4th and Thanksgiving. The parties will
alternate years thereafter.
For the Christmas holiday, the holiday shall be divided into two
2. The father now pays support for Abby.
.2.
98-2888 CIVIL TERM
segments from December 24th at noon until December 25th at noon,
and from December 25th at noon until December 28th at noon. These
two segments shall be alternated between the parties, with the Mother
enjoying the first segment on the Christmas holiday of 1998.
The Father shall always have custody of the minor child on Father's Day,
and the Mother shall always have custody on Mother's Day. This
provision to supersede any other custody provision outlined above.
In July, 1998, the mother moved to Linglestown, Dauphin County, to live with
James Brenner whom she met In March, 1998. Abby continued to live with her
maternal grandparents in their home where she has lived since birth. The father did
not know that Abby was going to remain with her maternal grandparents when he
agreed to the custody order dated July 29, 1998. On October 7, 1998, the father filed
a petition to modify the custody order to award him primary physical custody since
Abby was living with her maternal grandparents and not her mother. The parents
agreed to a custody evaluation by Arnold T. Shienvold, Ph.D., a clinical psychologist.
Following a conciliation conference a temporary order was entered on August 5,
1997, that provides:
Pending further Order of this Court, this Court's prior Order of July 29,
1998 shall remain in effect subject to the following modifications:
A. Father's periods of temporary custody on alternating weekends
shall be expanded to Friday at 5:00 p.m. until Monday morning
when Father shall make arrangements for return of the child to
the Maternal Grandparents prior to Father going to work or at
another time that morning agreeable to the parties.
B. Father shall have additional periods of temporary custody at least
two times each week in accordance with the report of Dr.
Shienvold. In the event Father's work schedule is such that he
can coordinate an evening and morning off during the week that
-3-
-F
96.2668 CIVIL TERM
would be consecutive, then Father would be allowed an
opportunity to have the child on an evening overnight into the
following morning mid-week, Father shall notify the Maternal
Grandparents on Thursday of each week as to when he intends
to exercise weekday visitation with the minor child the following
week.
Depending on the father's work schedule, he has Abby for an additional overnight
stays during each week. He or a member of his family picks up and returns her to
her maternal grandparents' home for all his periods of temporary physical custody.°
A hearing on the merits of the father's petition to modify the custody order was
conducted on September 16, 1997. The court granted a petition of the maternal
grandparents to be joined as defendants. The Legislature has provided at 23 Pa.C.S,
Section 6313(b) for those circumstances under which a grandparent may seek
physical and legal custody of their grandchild. The Section provides:
(b) Physical and legal custody.--A grandparent has standing to
bring a petition for physical and legal custody of a grandchild. If it is in
the best interest of the child not to be in the custody of either parent and
if it is in the best interest of the child to be in the custody of the
Grandparent, the court may award physical and legal custody to the
grandparent. This subsection applies to a grandparent:
(1) who has genuine care and concern for the child;
(2) whose relationship with the child began with the consent of a
parent of the child or pursuant to an order of court; and
(3) who for 12 months has assumed the role and responsibilities
of the child's parent, providing for the physical, emotional and social
needs of the child ...
3. The maternal grandmother's home in Camp HIII is approximately a twenty
minute drive from the father's home in Boiling Springs. It takes about the same
amount of time to drive from the maternal grandmother's home to the mother's home
in Linglestown.
-4-
98-2888 CIVIL TERM
In Ellerbe v. Hooks, 490 Pa. 383 (1980), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
adopted the standard of review in a custody contest between a parent and a third
party set forth In In Re Hernandez, 249 Pa. Super. 274 (1977), as follows:
[P] arents have a 'prima facie right to custody,' which 'may be
forfeited if convincing reasons appear that the best interests of the
child will be served by awarding custody to someone else.' .. .
[T]he Superior Court, through Judge Spaeth, articulated the
following approach:
'When the judge is hearing a dispute between the parents,
or a parent, and a third party.... [t]he question still Is,
what is In the child's best interest? However, the parties
do not start out even; the parents have a 'prima facie right
to custody,' which will be forfeited only If 'convincing
reasons' appear that the child's best interest will be served
by an award to the third party. Thus, even before the
proceedings start, the evidentlary scale is tipped, and
tipped hard, to the parents' side....
We agree that this approach Is appropriate. Clearly these
principles do not preclude an award of custody to the non-parent.
Rather they simply Instruct the hearing judge that the non-parent
bears the burden of production and the burden of persuasion and
that the non-parent's burden Is heavy.
Thus where circumstances do not clearly indicate the
appropriateness of awarding custody to a non-parent, we believe
the less intrusive and hence the proper course Is to award
custody to the parent or parents.
In Rowles v. Rowles, 542 Pa. 443 (1995), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
reexamined the appropriate standard of proof in custody disputes between a parent
and a non-parent. The Opinion Announcing the Judgment of the Court sought to
abandon the presumption in favor of the parent in such cases. That opinion,
-5-
W2988 CIVIL TERM
supported by three out of six Justices, stated:
'By clearly eliminating the presumption per so, and mandating that
custody be determined by a preponderance of evidence, weighing
parenthood as s strong factor for consideration, custody proceedings
would be disentangled from the burden of applying a presumption that
merely beclouds the ultimate concern In these cases: the determination
of what affiliation will best serve the child's Interests, Including physical,
emotional, Intellectual, moral, and spiritual well-being....' [w]e now
abandon the presumption that a parent has a prima facie right to
custody as against third parties .... Thus, there is no single overriding
factor; rather, courts should consider every fact relevant to the physical,
emotional, Intellectual, moral, and spiritual well-being of a child.
Parenthood, though not paramount, will always be a factor of significant
weight, ... '[t]he parent-child relationship should be considered to be
of importance in determining which custody arrangement is in the child's
best interest,' 'special weight' and 'deference' should be accorded the
parent-child relationship, and the relationship should not be disturbed
'without some showing of harm' or unless circumstances 'clearly indicate
the appropriateness of awarding custody to a non-parent,' We adhere
to these principles, for, in general, parents have a deep, abiding
commitment to the well-being of their children. (Citations omitted.)
The three judges who concurred In the result in Rowles stated that they did
not share the belief that the presumption that a parent has a prima facie right to
custody as against third parties should be abolished. As the Superior Court of
Pennsylvania noted in J.A.L. v. E.P.H., _ Pa. Super. _, 882 A,2d 1314 (1998), the
plurality opinion of Rowles Is not binding upon the Superior Court or the trial courts.
The Superior Court then stated In footnote two "[m]oreover, even if the position
espoused by the lead opinion in Rowles becomes law, the more flexible standard
employed in that case would still grant some special protection to the parent in
custody disputes with non-parents."
In the case &} jud , the mother's fiancee and the maternal grandmother
-8.
9&2888 CIVIL TERM
work at the same McDonalds with the mother. During periods of time that Abby Is
not with her father, either the mother, her fiancee, or the maternal grandmother have
her. No baby-sitters are used. At times when the mother Is not working, during the
day she takes her son Michael to her parents' home to be with Abby, On most days
when Abby is not with her father, the mother Is with her, sometimes up to nine hours.
On Thursday of each week, the father receives his work schedule for the following
week. He then coordinates his schedule with the maternal grandmother so that she
can make up the schedule for the next week consistent with his award of temporary
physical custody.' The complicated schedule Insures that either the maternal
grandmother, the mother, the mother's fiancee or the father are with Abby and that
one of those persons, excluding the father herein, are with Michael. This arrangement
works, although the father complains that he does not get Abby for as much
additional time as he would like to have her. The father essentially has Abby during
periods of time when he Is not working. If the father were to have primary physical
custody, he would use a baby-sitter for Abby during periods of time that he is working
and his parents are unable to care for her. Both paternal grandparents have day time
weekday jobs.
Dr. Shienvold found Abby to be happy, well-adjusted and meeting all
developmental goals. His opinion is that it is not in the best interest of Abby to
4. There Is little direct communication between the father and mother although
their joint efforts have served Abby's best interests.
-7-
96.2868 CIVIL TERM
abruptly change primary physical custody from "one family to another," He basis his
opinion on the developmental needs of Abby as a toddler for emotional security that
is established by trust and stability provided by her care-givers. Abby has bonded to
both her mother and her maternal grandparents as a result of living in the home of
her maternal grandparents since birth, Because neither the father nor his parents had
any contact with Abby for the first seven months of her life until paternity was
established, the depth of Abby's relationship with them Is not as strong as with the
members of the Butala household. Given the strong interest and care that the father
and his family have and provide for Abby, Dr. Shlenvold believes that there will be
greater bonding with them as time passes, Since both parents are young and
Immature, Dr, Shienvold believes that the role of grandparents In Abby life has been
an important factor in her stable development.
Dr. Shienvold questions whether the mother will stabilize her life to a point
where she is able to provide care for both her son Michael and Abby. Thus, he
believes that the time may come where the father should become the primary
custodian of Abby. However, Dr, Shienvold believes it is In the best Interest of Abby
to maintain the current living arrangement along with an increase in time spent with
the father as provided for in the temporary custody order entered on August 5, 1997.
Dr, Shienvold believes that this arrangement will create greater security for Abby
during this critically Important developmental stage of her life. The mother is now
spending as much time with Abby as the father, If the mother is unable to reach her
-8•
98-2888 CIVIL TERM
goal of being able to care for Abby by the end of the summer of 1998, then Dr.
Shlenvold believes, assuming that the father's bonds with Abby have developed
further, that the period of transition will be sufficient for a change in primary physical
custody to the father without risking averse affects to the child.
Both parents love and provide good care to Abby as do both sets of
grandparents. However, neither parent has the means to care for Abby without the
secondary assistance of their respective parents. The father's goal is to establish a
separate household In which he can take care of Abby. No time frame Is apparent for
reaching that goal. The mother does not believe she can properly care of Abby In the
home In which she now lives, She believes that it will take up to a year before she
can obtain a home in which she could care for both Michael and Abby. To currently
change Abby's living arrangement would mean that some of the care now provided
by her maternal grandparents and her mother to whom she has more closely bonded
than with the father will be provided by a baby-sitter.
If ever there was wisdom in applying the standard of proof advanced by a
plurality of the Supreme Court In Rowles v. Rowles, this is the case. Rigid
definitions of primary, temporary and shared physical custody have already been
blurred by the parents and grandparents acting in the best interest of Abby. The
maternal grandparents do not view themselves as Abby's primary custodian despite
the fact that she stays overnight in their home when she is not with the father. They
defer to the mother for all major decisions regarding the care of Abby. Under the
-9.
96-2888 CIVIL TERM
temporary custody order, the mother sees Abby as frequently as does the father.
While the mother strives to be Independent, It Is her work schedule and the care she
provides to her baby son that has resulted In her continuing to seek the assistance of
her parents for the care of Abby. It was the father's fault that he did not see Abby for
a fourth of her current life. During that period, there was no one to help the mother
other than her parents. Since Abby's birth, the maternal grandparents have had
genuine care and concern for her, their relationship with her has been with the
consent of the mother, and they have assumed a role and responsibility as a parent
in providing for her physical, emotional and social needs.
Although the recommendation of a psychologist are not binding on this court,
L.D. v. B.D., 291 Pa. Super. 589 (1981), we find the expert testimony of Dr. Shlenvold
to be persuasive on the non-advisability of changing the stable living arrangement of
Abby during this critical stage in her development. No relationship will be disturbed
by maintaining the status quo in the best Interest of Abby. Considering the
parent/child relationship and the status of both the mother and the father along with
all of the factors set forth herein relating to the well-being of Abby, the following
shared legal and physical custody order is entered.
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this V day of September, 1997, IT IS ORDERED:
(1) The orders of July 29, 1998 and August 5, 1997, ARE VACATED and
replaced with this order.
.t0-
96-2868 CIVIL TERM
(2) Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., and Christy M. Butala shall have shared legal
custody of their daughter, Abby L. Butala, born June 3, 1995.
(3) Abby L. Butala shall be with her mother and maternal grandparents except
when she Is with her father as follows:
(a) On alternating weekends from Friday evening at 5:00 p.m. until
Monday when he goes to work.
(b) Two other days during each week at times when he Is not working.
On his current work schedule If he is working 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.:
from after work until 8:00 p.m. If he Is working 2:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.:
from 9:00 a.m. until he goes to work. If these two days are back to
back: for overnight until he goes to work the next day.
(c) On the alternating holidays of New Year's Day, Easter, Memorial
Day, July 4th, Labor Day and Thanksgiving with the holidays alternating
each year.
(4) In addition:
(a) The Christmas holiday shall be divided into two segments from
December 24th at noon until December 25th at noon and from
December 25th at noon until December 26th at noon. The father having
the first segment for 1997 with the segments alternating each year.
(b) The father shall always have Abby on Father's Day and the mother
shall always have Mother's Day.
-11.
88.2889 CIVIL TERM
(5) The parties shall cooperate In adjusting the pick up and delivery times on
this schedule as may be necessary to tacllltate their work schedules.
By the Court, i
Edgar B. Bayley, J.
Harold S. Irwin, III, Esquire
For the Father
Kathleen C. Daley, Esquire
For the Mother
;saa
-12-
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR.,
Plaintiff
V.
CHRISTY M. BUTALA,
Defendant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 96-2868 CIVIL TERM
IN CUSTODY
ORDERR OE COURT
AND NOW this > day of ) ^ , 1997, this Court, upon consideration
of the within Petition, does HEREBY ORDER that Michael J. Butala and Patricia Butala, the
maternal grandparents of Abby L, Butala, are Defendants in the above-captioned action. The caption
shall be modified to reflect the addition of these parties as Defendants.
,
07 r ^r I I: ";J
r (, , r
•r ,
1
1
L
I
? ? 1 11 I I, I I.' I . r 1
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR.,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
V.
CHRISTY M, BUTALA,
Defendant
NO. 96-2868 CIVIL TERM
CIVIL ACTION - CUSTODY
1. The Petitioners are Patricia and Michael J. Butala, the maternal grandparents of Abby
L. Butala, adult individuals who reside at 5 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, Cumberland County,
Pennsylvania 17011. Joining in this petition is the Defendant, Christy M. Butala, an adult individual
who resides at 6262 Elmer Avenue, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania.
2. The Respondent is Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., the Plaintiff in the above-captioned
action who resides at 17 Hope Drive, Boiling Springs, Cumberland County„ Pennsylvania.
3. The action in question is an action in custody filed by Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr„ the
father of Abby L. Butala, born June 3, 1995.
4. Christy M. Butala has appeared and participated in this action as a named Defendant
to date, however, Patricia and Michael J. Butala have also participated in this action since its
inception, as the maternal grandparents of Abby L. Butala.
5. Abby L. Butala has resided with the Petitioners since shortly after her date of birth and
the Petitioners have been primarily responsible for her care since the time she was born. They have
served in loco parentis as the result of their on-going role with this child.
6. On this basis, Patricia and Michael Butala believe that they are necessary and
appropriate parties in this action and would ask to be joined as named party Defendants in the above-
captioned matter.
WHEREFORE, the Petitioners pray this Honorable Court to list Patricia Butala and Michael
J. Butala as Defendants in the above-captioned action permitting them to proceed Defendant's in this
action.
Respectfully submitted,
?Q-
'G
kWf
athleen Carey Daley, ire
ALEY LAW OFFIC S
Attorney No. 30078
1029 Scenery Drive
Harrisburg, PA 17109
(717) 657-4795
Attorney for Petitioners
/6fil 7 ` d3$ 60W VINVA960199 (i Z)
IASNN3d`%nGSR121VH
r1? 3AR1a M3N33S6Mj
S3314AO MM A31V4
q
('? JUL,
STEPHEN A. SENSENICH, JR.,
Plaintiff
V
CHRISTY M. BUTALA,
Defendant
30 1997
:IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
:CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
t
:CIVIL ACTION - LAW
:NO: 96 - 2868
:IN CUSTODY
COURT ORDER
AND NOW, this aL day of C?ctt , 1997, upon
consideration of the attached Custody C cil aatti`on Report, it is
ordered and directed as follows:
1. A hearing is scheduled in Court Room No. 2 of the Cumberland
County Courthouse on the 15L?day of _ ??62?pa.k ti , 1997 at
.,m. at which time testimony will be 'taken in this case.
At this hearing, the Father shall be the moving party and
shall proceed initially with testimony. Counsel for the
parties shall file with the Court and opposing counsel a
memorandum setting forth the history of custody in this case,
the issues currently before the Court and each party's
position on those issues, a list of witnesses who will be
called to testify and a summary of the anticipated testimony
of each witness. This memorandum shall be filed at least ten
(10) days prior to the hearing date.
2. The Maternal Grandparents shall file a petition with the Court
in order to have them listed as a named party in this
litigation in light of the fact that the child is living with
them.
3. Pending further Order of this Court, this Court's prior Order
of July 29, 1996 shall remain in effect subject to the
following modificationst
A. Father's periods of temporary custody on alternating
weekends shall be expanded to Friday at 5:00 p.m. until
Monday morning when Father shall make arrangements for
return of the child to the Maternal Grandparents prior to
Father going to work or at another time that morning
agreeable to the parties.
B. Father shall have additional periods of temporary custody
at least two times each week in accordance with the
report of Dr. Shinevold. In the event Father's work
schedule is such that he can coordinate an evening and
morning off during the week that would be consecutive,
then Father would be allowed an opportunity to have the
child on an evening overnight into the following morning
mid-week. Father shall notify the Maternal Grandparents
on Thursday of each week as to when he intends to
exercise weekday visitation with the minor child the
following week.
BY THE
rsogar b
cot Kathleen c. Daley, Esquire..
Harold S. Irwin, III, Esquire
R_16'1 o.
a•6'.
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR.,
Plaintiff
V
CHRISTY M. BUTALA,
Defendant
Prior Judge: Edgar B. Bayley
:IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
:CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
:CIVIL ACTION - LAW
:NO: 96 - 2868
:IN CUSTODY
CONCILIATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY REPORT
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CUMBERLAND COUNTY CIVIL RULE OF PROCEDURE
1915.3-8(b), the undersigned Custody Conciliator submits the
following report:
1. The pertinent information pertaining to the child who is the
subject of this litigation is as followst
Abby L. Butala, born June 3, 1995.
2. A Conciliation Conference was held on July 24, 1997, with the
following individuals in attendance:
The Father, Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., with his counsel,
Harold S. Irwin, III, Esquire, and the Maternal Grandparents,
with their Counsel, Kathleen C. Daley, Esquire.
3. This case was before the Conciliator previously in January of
1997. At that time, the parties had agreed to a custody
evaluation being performed. The evaluation is complete.
4. The existing situation is that the minor child is residing
with the Maternal Grandparents. The Mother is living in
another location. The Mother has primary custody, but the
child remains with the Maternal Grandparents. The Father is
exercising periods of temporary custody. Father is seeking a
change in custody to provide him with primary custody. The
Mother would not agree to such a change. Essentially, the
Maternal Grandparents are suggesting that they have a basis to
claim custody and will be filing a document asserting that
claim.
5. The parties could not reach an agreement. The parties did
agree on expansion of the Father's existing custody rights
pursuant to the recommendations of the evaluator.
6. The Conciliator recommends an Order in the form as attached.
J y A , /? A,
TE Hubert X.-Gilroy, Esquire
Custody Concil fa tor
HAROLD S. IRWIN, Ill, ESQUIRE
ATTORNEY ID NO.29920
35 EAST HIGH STREET
CARLISLE PA 17013
(717) 2434M
ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
Petitioner : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
: NO. 96 - 2868 CIVIL TERM
CHRISTY M. BUTALA, ;
Respondent : CUSTODY
NOW, this I i ??x day of October, 1996, on consideration of the attached petition, it is
hereby directed that the parties and their respective counsel appear before Hubert X. Gilroy,
Esquire, the conciliator, on the 4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse, on the W41- day of
"oJ(h\\)K_ , 1996, at Ab/l M, for a Pre-Hearing Custody Conference. At such
conference, an effort will be made to resolve the issues in dispute; or if this cannot be
accomplished, to define and narrow the issues to be heard by the Court and to enter into a
temporary order. Failure to appear at this conference may provide grounds for entry of a
temporary or permanent order.
By the Court,
By: 71 V c 7is ,h I , it I
Custody Conciliatof V
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU
DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE
THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL
HELP.
Court Administrator
Cumberland County Courthouse
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717)240-6200
r:
y?41 /.(e jJ4 ? e e.
ld4va ?9, • .s ay s E:
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR.,
Petitioner
V.
CHRISTY 1W. BUTALA,
Respondent
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
: NO. 96 - 2868 CIVIL TERM
: CUSTODY
NOW comes the petitioner, Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., by his attorney, Harold S, Irwin,
111, and presents the following petition for modification of custody, representing as follows:
The petitioner is Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., an adult individual residing at 17 Hope
Drive, Boiling Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17007.
2. The respondent is Christy M. Butala, an adult individual whose present residence is
unknown to plaintiff, but whose last known address was with her parents at 5 Hunter Lane, Camp
Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17011.
3. The parties have never been married.
4. The parties are the natural parents of a minor child, namely Abby L. Butala, who
was born June 3, 1995.
5. The panics attended a custody conciliation conference on July 16, 1996, during
which they reached an agreement as to the issues of custody, partial custody and visitation. Said
agreement was the subject of an Order of this Court, dated July 29, 1996, a copy of which is
incorporated herein by reference and attached hereto as Exhibit" N'.
6. The child resided with tite respondent and respondent's parents ftom the birth of
the child until at or near the time of the previous custody conciliation on July 16, 1996. Petitioner
has become aware of the fact that at or near the time of the conference, respondent moved out of
her parents' residence and the child has resided solely with respondent's parents since that time.
7. Petitioner has continued to exercise joint legal custody and temporary custody of
the child according to the terns of the agreement and Order of Court since that time.
8. Petitioner believes and therefor avers that the best interests and permanent welfare
of the child requires, that the parties continue to have joint legal custody of the child, but that
petitioner have primary physical custody of the child, subject to respondent's periods of
reasonable, temporary physical custody and visitation of the child on a scheduled basis.
9. The basis for the relief requested by petitioner is that respondent has left her
parents' residence without the child and is no longer caring for the child in any significant way.
Petitioner believes that it is in the best interests and permanent welfare of the child that a parent of
the child, namely petitioner, exercise primary physical custody of the child and have the
opportunity to provide the child with consistent, daily care, love, affection, parental guidance and
control, rather than the child's grandparents. Petitioner remains living with his parents, is
obtaining college education, is gainfully employed and continues to remain ready, willing and able
to provide a stable, loving environment for the child.
WHEREFORE, petitioner respeetfUlly requests that the court enter an order providing
that the parties have joint legal custody of the child, that petitioner have primary physical custody
of the child and that respondent have visitation and temporary custody on a scheduled basis.
October , 1996
HAROLD S. IRW N, III
Attorney for petits er
35 East High Street
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
(717) 243-6090
Supreme Court I.D. No. 29920
I do hereby verify that the acts set forth in this petition are true and correct. I understand
that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating
to unswom falsification to authorities.
October, 1996 yL' 4f
STEPHEN SENSENICH,JR.
m
A
W R
as
0
w a n w y '
1
? C
0 rl ?
0 '?• .
C F
O F ,
1
rt 4
0
'
al ,,
„
a x
a
?
H H? E. O O
0 0
O O p
u U 2 H ?•
'l. •+ PO•
W N 0.1 VI
wl
w l
q
Y
Oua env v 0101 f1!?-
W in ?r o 2 0• m. 0 ? 4
Ox FmF+
W I 1
•H01
'^
•?
-C ri kv (A
N
O N
vJ
F
•Q m y
a >4 "I-Al
w' a cv L) F LIYI S q 4 w
5 w a i a MIMI *? k
O m . aiul O
?
UP
y w a w ?
i
. l R `
wuu x u •?I
a
z
w
01 ? U
w
o 11
z V)
M
HAROLD S. IRWIN, Ill, ESQUIRE
ATTORNEY ID NO, 299211
36 SOUTH PITT STREET
CARLISLE PA 17013
(717) 24")90
ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR., : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V. : CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 9?-,•??L f?' CIVIL TERM
CHRISTY M. BUTALA,
Defendant :CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT
NOW, this 'n 1 day of _ 1996, on consideration of the attached petition,
it is hereby directed that the parties an their respective counsel appear before Hubert X. Gilroy,
Esquir , the conciliator, on the 4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse, on the ,2 L( day of
1996, at Vii: ?A M. for a Pre-Hearing Custody Conference. At such
confe nce, an effort will be made to resolve the issues in dispute; or if this cannot be
accomplished, to define and narrow the issues to be heard by the Court and to enter into a
temporary order. Failure to appear at this conference may provide grounds for entry of a
temporary or permanent order.
By the Court,
By: 7C?
ustody Conciliator
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU
DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE
THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL
HELP.
Court Administrator
Cumberland County Courthouse
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 240-6200
FILED-OF'FlCC
OF TI !r Vi? TF.!'ZOTMY
06 AN -4 FM 2c S9
r?uvsnvafv?
11 1
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR., : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V. : CIVIL ACTION - LAW
: NO.9I- IY6i CIVIL TERM
CHRISTY M. BUTALA,
Defendant : CUSTODY
PETITION FOR PARTIAL CUSTODY
AND VISITATION
NOW comes the petitioner, Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., by his attorney, Harold S. Irwin,
111, and presents the following petition for partial custody and visitation, representing as follows:
The petitioner is Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., an adult individual residing at 17 Hope
Drive, Boiling Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17007.
The respondent is Christy M. Butala, an adult individual residing at 5 Hunter Lane,
Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17011.
The parties have never been married.
4. The parties are the natural parents of a minor child, namely Abby L, Butala, who
was born. June 3, 1995.
5. The child has resided with the respondent since the birth of the child and petitioner
has enjoyed limited visitation and temporary custody by mutual agreement of the parties since that
time.
6. Petitioner has presented respondent with a written agreement to memorialize their
understanding with regard to his visitation and temporary custody of the child and the parties have
been carry out those terns for the most part, but respondent has been unwilling to date to sign the
agreement.
7. Petitioner believes and therefor avers that the best interests and permanent welfare
of the child requires that the parties have joint legal custody of the child and that respondent have
primary physical custody of the child, but that petitioner have reasonable temporary physical
custody and visitation of the child on a scheduled basis.
WHEREFORE, petitioner respectfully requests that the court enter an order providing
that the parties have joint legal custody of the child, that respondent have primary physical
custody of the child and that petitioner have visitation and temporary custody on a scheduled
basis.
May 1 3, 1996
/-< tel.
HAROLD S.
Attorney for
36 South Pitt Street
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
(717) 243-6090
Supreme Court I.D. No. 29920
VFR/FLCATION
1 do hereby verity that the acts set forth in this petition are true and correct. I understand
that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating
to unsworn falsification to authorities.
May &, 1996 Y!! t?,. e.
STEPHEN EN IL SENSENICH, 311
r
i
.r
w
r?
r
1v? ,v
a
as
x z
a w w , i+ co
oF0H zH am pp o
`
z
H
o t
.7 ro
L) a F
CJ R,
? a .? 3
00 > 014 O
U U oHUo z
N r4 W W 44
L
M }Q?
C
44 E.0 2?
a
Q
b1
R (
o rn
D
F
c
i >»
O WM a H WI g•.1k Ak
tl1 a
v >im z ?
W U U x U p
F w 2 E
yf
o
z
H
a
LAW OFFICES
11AR014).S'. /R«/N, I//
.r ?
k r?
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR.,
Plaintiff
V.
CHRISTY M. BUTALA,
Defendant
t IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
t CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
I
t CIVIL ACTION - LAW
t NO. 96 - 2868 CIVIL TERM
CIVIL ACTION - CUSTODY
AND NOW, this I?V%% _ day of , 1996, upon
consideration of the attached Custo 4)??Xliation Report, Itis
ordered and directed as follows:
1. The Father, Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., and the Mother, Christy
M. Butala, shall enjoy shared legal custody of Abby L. Butala,
born June 3, 1995.
2. The Mother shall enjoy primary physical custody of the minor
child.
3. The Father shall enjoy temporary periods of physical custody
of the minor child as follows:
A. On alternating weekends from Friday at 5:00 p.m. until
Sunday at 5:00 p.m. Additionally, on those other
weekends when Father is available and the parties can
agree, Mother will provide Father with periods of
additional temporary custody with the minor child.
B. Alternating holidays to include New Year's Day, Easter,
Memorial Day, July 4th, Labor Day and Thanksgiving. The
Father shall have custody of the minor child in odd
numbered years for New Year's, Memorial Day and Labor
Day, with the Mother having custody of the minor child in
odd numbered years on Easter, July 4th and Thanksgiving.
The parties will alternate years thereafter.
4. For the Christmas holiday, the holiday shall be divided into
two segments from December 24th at noon until December 25th at
noon, and from December 25th at noon until December 26th at
noon. These two segments shall be alternated between the
parties, with the Mother enjoying the first segment on the
Christmas holiday of 1996.
5. The Father shall always have custody of the minor child on
Father's Day, and the Mother shall always have custody on
Mother's Day. This provision to supersede any other custody
provision outlined above.
6. The parties may alter the schedule set forth above as they may
agree. In the event the parties reach an impasse on any
modification, the schedule as set forth above shall control.
7. In the event either party desires to modify the schedule
above, that party may petition the Court to have the case
again scheduled for a conference with the Cuskac?y /Conciliator.
BY THE COURT, / J
oar Harold S. Irwin, III, Esquire
Kathleen Carey Daley, Esquire ?'
;,
-.
? i fr,,,.
.'c.% :?
?? ? ,'"?`, i 'i
:? 4 1
...? .
/,?/? ';
?. ? ? 6
? J'
? ..
? ? i'„?
i ? ? ? i
?i
'. ? ? 1
i
' ? ?
' ?
?, i 1
' ? ? i. I
?i 1
i ? ? ? ?
i ? ? ? '
i
i
'.
i i. I ? i ' i
I
i ?. ? I i ' I
.. I i ? i ? i
i 1
? i rl I
i ? 1 ??.?
i i
? ?
i. I
i ? I 1 1 ?
i
i 1 ? i ?
1 I 'i 1
i ? ? i I i
' ? ? i ' ? i
I i ?
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR., t IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
Plaintiff t CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
t
V. t CIVIL ACTION - LAW
t
CHRISTY M. BUTALA, t NO. 96 - 2868 CIVIL TERM
Defendant r
t CIVIL ACTION - CUSTODY
CONCILIATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY REPORT
IN ACCORDANCE WITH CUMBERLAND COUNTY CIVIL RULE OF PROCEDURE
1915.3-8(b), the undersigned Custody Conciliator submits the
following reports
1. The information pertaining to the child who is subject of this
litigation is as follows:
Abby L. Butala, born June 3, 1995
2. A Conciliation Conference was held on July 16, 1996, with the
following individuals in attendances
The Father, Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., with his counsel,
Harold Irwin, Esquire, the Mother, Christy M. Butala, with her
counsel, Kathleen Daley, Esquire.
3. The parties agreed to the entry of an Order in the form as
attached.
172 Q
Date
Custody Concil
.\f I
/ty
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, Jr.,
Plaintiff
V
CHRISTY M. BUTALA,
Defendant
Prior Judge: Edgar B. Bayley
:IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
tCUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
t
tCIVIL ACTION - LAW
t
:NO: 96 - 2868
:IN CUSTODY
COURT ORDER
AND NOW, this day of January, 1997, upon consideration of
the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and
directed as followst
1. The parties shall submit themselves, the minor child and any
other individuals determined by counsel for the parties or the
Evaluator to a custody evaluation to be performed by an
Independent Evaluator retained by counsel for the parties.
Costa of this evaluation shall be shared by the parties. It
is the intent that this evaluation is to address various
issues of custody that both parties have relating to this
particular case. The Independent Evaluator shall provide
counsel for the parties with a written report concerning the
findings of their evaluation, with the hope that this report
is available prior to the conciliation conference scheduled
below.
2. The parties shall convene for another custody conciliation
conference on Thursday, March 27 at 8:30 a.m.
act Kathleen C. Daley, Esquire _ LLd irrw ??.C 111?14q,
Harold S. Irwin, III, Esquire _ U A .0 ,
i
??Lrn. ?,~r;?,r--.
i?1 r:,, ? I 'J ..;'r ?1, I
7
I
h?,?
:,; .
?I'i?ir????l?i?i.'I,'1 ?? i
'. n
I
' ? ,.
. I ,
I I
,.
,.
I I
i I i ? i
?I I i ?.
i I i i
II i ?
i ? r I
i I ,. i
I 1 ? I
i i I 'I I i.
i i ? i ? i I i ? ? ? a i i
i ? ? i ? ? i i I ? ?
' 1 i
i i ?. 1
i I ? I ?i ? ? ? ? ? i i
y ? ? '. i
I
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, Jr.,
Plaintiff
V
CHRISTY M. BUTALA,
Defendant
Prior Judge: Edgar B. Bayley
:IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
:CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
t
:CIVIL ACTION - LAW
r
:NO: 96 - 2868
:IN CUSTODY
CONCILIATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY REPORT
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CUMBERLAND COUNTY CIVIL RULE OF PROCEDURE
1915.3-8(b), the undersigned Custody Conciliator submits the
following report:
1. The pertinent information pertaining to the child who is the
subject of this litigation is as follows:
Abby. L. Butala, born June 3, 1995.
2. A Conciliation Conference was held on January 9, 1997, with
the following individuals in attendance: The Father, Stephen
R. Sensenich, Jr., with his counsel, Harold S. Irwin, III,
Esquire, and the Mother, Christy M. Butala, with her counsel,
Kathleen C. Daley, Esquire.
3. The parties agreed to the entry of an Order in the form at
attached.
_L_
DA E
Hubert X. Gilroy
Custody Concilia
HAROLD E. IRWIN, III, REQUIRE
ATTORNEY ID NO. =0020
30 MET HIGH STREET
CARLIM PA 17013
(717) 243-6000
ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER
STEPHEN R. SRNSENICH, JR.,
Petitioner
V.
CHRISTY M. BUTALA,
Respondent
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: CIVIL ACTION . LAW
: NO. 86 . 2868 CIVIL TERM
:CUSTODY
PET/T/O M2 ANSWER TO PET/T/ON TO ?O/N
MATERNAL GRANDPARENTS AS PART/ES
NOW, comes petitioner, Stephen R Sensenich, Jr„ by his attorney, Harold S.
Irwin, III, Esquire, and responds to the petition of Michael J. Butala and Patricia Butala,
maternal grandparents of the minor child, Abby L. Butala, to be joined as parties to this
action, representing as follows:
1. The averments of fact contained in paragraph one of the petition are
admitted.
2. The averments of fact contained in paragraph two of the petition are
admitted.
3. The averments of fact contained in paragraph three of the petition are
admitted
5? 4
4. The everments of fact contained in paragraph four of the petition are admitted
in part and denied In part. Other than accompanying Christy M. Butala to some of the
prior proceedings, and other than Patricia Butala appearing on behalf of Christy M.
Butala at the last custody conciliation conference, Michael J. Butala and Patricia Butala
have not appeared or participated in this action.
5, The averments of fact contained in paragraph five of the petition are admitted
in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Michael J. Butala and Patricia Butala have
unilaterally assumed a major role in the care of the child since the child has resided
with them. It is denied that they have done so out of necessity or with the permission,
consent or desire of petitioner, Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., who at all times relevant
hereto has been ready, willing and able to assume the care of his daughter, Abby L.
Butele. On the contrary, Michael J. Butala and Patricia Butala have actively interfered
in the relationship of Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr. with the child and sought to limit his
contact with the child and his involvement in her life even after the child's mother,
Christy M. Butala, left the child with the Butala's and moved to Perry County with her
boyfriend. The averment that the Butala's "have served in loco parentis as the result of
their ongoing role with this child" is a conclusion of law to which no response is
required. However, to the extent that a response is required, this averment is
specifically denied for the reasons set forth in the brief of Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr.,
filed on September 8, 1997, the applicable contents of which are incorporated herein
by reference.
6. The averments of paragraph six of the petition are specifically
denied. On the contrary, Michael J. Butala and Patricia Butala are not necessary and
appropriate parties in this action. For the reasons set forth in the brief of Stephen R.
Sensenich, Jr., filed on September 8, 1997, the applicable contents of which are
incorporated herein by reference, it is submitted that the Butalas have no standing in
this matter to seek custody for themselves nor to prevent petitioner from obtaining
? .
custody in accordance with the request contained in his petition. Furthermore, as
required by law and rules of procedure, none of the parties to the instant petition have
signed the petition, nor have they verified its contents and factual averments.
WHEREFORE, Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., submits that the petition of Michael J.
Butale and Patricia Butala, joined by Christy M. Butala, should be denied.
September 9, 1997
HAROLD S. IRWIN III
Attorney for PetltIo
36 East High Street
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
(717)243-6090
Supreme Court ID No. 29920
VERIFICATION
The foregoing answer is based upon information which has been gathered by my
counsel In the preparation of this lawsuit. The language of the document is the
language of my counsel and not my own. I have read the answer and to the extent that
it is based upon information which I have given to my counsel, it is true and correct to
the best of my knowledge, information and belief. To the extent that the content of the
answer is that of counsel, I have relied upon counsel in making this verification. I
understand that false statements made herein are subject to the penalties of 18
Pa.C.S.A. Section 4094, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
September (Z1, 1997 1~? N G c? 1
ST PHEN R. SENSENICH, JR. C, f
N
Q 5L a q y
W h ? C "?„? n
oa F ~
3 u 4-J tn
3
E 2 H W W w a H
UU
O J
u
z >
W H 3
V
H
t
y
D
? 1? v?
iZ
N
P4 e
c • a n
aN LY. y g Qk kk
U Mm z
H ? O W
U x
Z y
H W
HAROLD S. IRWIN, 111, ESQUIRE
ATTORNEY ID NO. 2#930
35 EAST HIGH STREET
CARLISLE PA 17013
(717) 2434
ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR.,
Petitioner
V.
CHRISTY M. BUTALA, MICHAEL
BUTALA and PATRICIA SUTALA,
Respondents
I IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
I CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
I CIVIL ACTION • LAW
I NO. 99.4995 CIVIL TERM
(CUSTODY
NOW, this -Z day of November, 1998, on consideration of the attached
petition, It is hereby directed that the parties and their respective counsel appear before
Hubert X. Gilroy, Este, the conciliator, on the 4th Floor, Cumberland County
Courthouse, on the c_ day of , 199q, at IQ, ? M. for a Pre-
Hearing Custody Conference. At such conferen e, an effort will be made to resolve the
issues In dispute; or if this cannot be accomplished, to define and narrow the issues to
be heard by the Court and to enter into a temporary order. Failure to appear at this
conference may provide grounds for entry of a temporary or permanent order.
By the Court,
By. T LIQ ?44N41
Custody Conciliator? j
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU
DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE
THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL
HELP.
Cumberland County Bar Association
2 Liberty Avenue
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 249-3166
I ?
Ole
Id.
1% 0
STEPHEN R. BENSENICH, JR.,
Petitioner
v,
CHRISTY M. RUTALA, MICHAEL
BUTALA and PATRICIA BUTALA,
Respondents
I IN THE COURT OR COMMON PLEAS OF
i CUMBERLAND COUNTYp PENNSYLVANIA
I CIVIL ACTION • LAW
I NO. 96.2060 CIVIL TERM
I
:CUSTODY
PETITIAN FOR MODIFICATION OF CUSTODY
NOW comes the petitioner, Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., by his attorney, Harold S.
Irwin, III, and presents the following petition for modification of custody, representing as
follows;
1. The petitioner is Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., an adult individual residing at
17 Hope Drive, Balling Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17007.
2. Respondent Christy M. Butala Is an adult Individual whose last known
address was 6262 Elmer Avenue, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania.
3. Respondents Michael J. Butala and Patricia Butala, are adult Individuals
who reside at 5 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17011.
4. The parties are the natural parents of a minor child, namely Abby L.
Butala, who was born June 3, 1995 and Is now about three and one-half (3 ''/z) years
old.
.4% ,
5. On September 23, 1997, the Court entered an Order providing for the
custody of the child. A copy the Order is incorporated herein by reference and attached
hereto as Exhibit "A".
6. The current Order of Court referred to above and attached hereto was
based, in part, on the custody evaluation performed by Dr. Arnold Shienvold, This
evaluation provided, Inter alia, that "if the mother is unable to reach her goal of being
able to care for Abby by the end of the summer of 1998, then ..., assuming that the
father's bonds with Abby have developed further, that the period of transition will be
sufficient for a change in primary physical custody to the father without risking averse
(sic) effects to the child." (Quoting Judge Bayley's opinion, at Page 9.)
7. Dr. Shienvold also stated in his report dated July 15, 1997, that "It would
be expected under this new arrangement that the Butala's would show a considerable
amount of flexibility In allowing Stephen Sensenich to spend time with his daughter. If
the Butala's are not capable of getting beyond their anger and encourage this
relationship between Stephen and his daughter, then this entire situation will need to be
re-evaluated. It is the responsibility, of the primary custodians to encourage a
relationship between the child and the biological parent. Failure on the Butala's part to
do that would increase the validity for a change in custody. (See final paragraph of Dr,
Shienvold's report)
8. Since the Court's order of September 23 1998, respondent Christy M.
Butala has not reached her goal of being able to care for the child, who remains living
with the maternal grandparents. In addition, since that time on over forty occasions
respondents have denied petitioner's reasonable requests to spend some additional
time with the child and on at least five occasions have denied petitioner his regularly
scheduled partial custody time with the child.
9. Petitioner believes and therefor avers that the best interests and
permanent welfare of the child requires that the parties continue to have joint legal
custody of the child, but that petitioner have primary physical custody of the child,
subject to respondent's periods of reasonable, temporary physical custody and
visitation of the child on a scheduled basis.
10. The basis for the relief requested by petitioner is that both conditions
therefor, as expressed in the opinion of Judge Bayley and in the report of Dr. Shainvold,
have been met, In addition, over the period of time since the September 23, 1998
Order of Court, petitioner and his family have had the opportunity to enjoy time with the
child on a regular basis, albeit not as often nor for as long as the would have liked.
During those visits the bonds between the child and petitioner, her father, and her
paternal grandparents have developed and strengthened such that petitioner believes
and therefor avers that no adverse effects will result from the change in custody at this
time.
11. In addition, petitioner believes that It is in the best Interests and
permanent welfare of the child that a parent of the child, namely petitioner, exercise
primary physical custody of the child and have the opportunity to provide the child with
consistent, daily care, love, affection, parental guidance and control, rather than the
child's grandparents, Petitioner remains living with his parents, is obtaining college
education, is gainfully employed and continues to remain ready, willing and able to
provide a stable, loving environment for the child.
' r r ? r
VERIFICATION
I do hereby verify that the acts set forth in this petition are true and correct I
understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa, C. S.
Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
r L,,
1998
STEPHEN A. SENSENICH, JFK
I f
I
A+ r r rllli ?u I
I I
r r I
I 11 r r i i
I
r ? ' ?. r r I r r i ?. '
r 1
I I '
1
EXHIBIT WINI
I'
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR„
PLAINTIFF
V.
CHRISTY M, BUTALA,
MICHAEL BUTALA AND
PATRICIA BUTALA,
DEFENDANTS
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
98-2888 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 2t? day of September, 1997, IT IS ORDERED:
(1) The orders of July 29, 1998 and August 5, 1997, ARE VACATED and
replaced with this order.
(2) Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., and Christy M. Butala shall have shared legal
custody of their daughter, Abby L. Butala, born June 3, 1995.
(3) Abby L. Butala shall be with her mother and maternal grandparents except
when she is with her father as follows:
(a) On alternating weekends from Friday evening at 5:00 p.m. until
Monday when he goes to work,
(b) Two other days during each week at times when he Is not working.
On his current work schedule if he is working 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.:
from after work until 8:00 p.m. If he is working 2:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.:
from 9:00 a.m. until he goes to work. If these two days are back to
back: for overnight until he goes to work the next day.
(c) On the alternating holidays of New Year's Day, Easter, Memorial
A- ,
.00 •.
Day, July 4th, labor Day and Thanksgiving with the holidays alternating
each year.
(4) In addition:
(a) The Christmas holiday shall be divided Into two segments from
December 24th at noon until December 25th at noon and from
December 25th at noon until December 26th at noon. The father having
the first segment for 1997 with the segments alternating each year.
(b) The father shall always have Abby on Father's Day and the mother
shall always have Mother's Day.
(5) The parties shall cooperate in adjusting the pick up and delivery times on
this schedule as may be necessary to facilitate their work schedules.
By 0771 ?1
ti .
J.
Harold S. Irwin, III, Esquire
For the Father
Kathleen C. Daley, Esquire
For the Mother
:sea
TRUE COPY W N RECORD
In Test:m_ny a • '. ! ' - ,1to set my haad
and ho sec, of c) d ",:; i at Carlisle, Pa.
This ... %2.4-.A day of
................S k?ArQt,S.....5t..t,...-4lP..4.Sr?....
Prothonotary
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR., : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
CHRISTY M. BUTALA,
MICHAEL BUTALA AND
PATRICIA BUTALA,
DEFENDANTS 96-2868 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: CUSTODY
BAYLEY, J., September 23, 1997:-
Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., age 24, and Christy Butala, age 22, are the parents
of Abby L. Butala, age 2, bom June 3, 1995. Neither parent has married. The father
lives In the home of his parents in which his sister also resides in Boiling Springs.
The mother lives with her fiancee, James Brenner, their five and one-half year old son
Michael Brenner, and a male friend of her fiancee, In Linglestown.' Abby lives in the
home of her matemal grandparents, Michael Butala and Patricia Butala, in Camp Hill.
The father Is a meat cutter at Karns Food in Boiling Springs where he has
worked for six years. He works shifts of either 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p,m. or 2:00 p.m. to
10:00 p.m. five days a week. The days vary although he rarely works on Sunday. He
work most Saturdays. The mother is a swing manager at a McDonalds restaurant.
She works 38 to 48 hours a week on an irregular schedule of 4:45 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.
or later, or 3:30 p.m. to midnight or later.
1. The home Is owned by Brennees mother who does not live there.
96-2886 CIVIL TERM
,
The mother and father began seeing each other while In college around the
beginning of 1994. They broke up in September, 1994, at a time when the mother
did not know she was pregnant. The mother told the father of her pregnancy in
October, 1994, but the father did not believe that the child was his. When Abby was
bom, the mother was living In the home of her parents in Camp Hill. The mother
Instituted support proceedings against the father. Blood tests were obtained which
convinced the father that Abby was his child.2 The father began seeing Abby In
January, 1996. The initial contact between the father and his daughter developed into
seeing each other every other weekend and occasionally some other days. On May
24, 1996, the father filed a complaint for partial physical custody of Abby. On July 29,
1996, a consent order was entered that provided both parents with shared legal
custody and the mother with primary physical custody of Abby, The father's periods
of temporary physical custody were:
On alternating weekends from Friday at 5:00 p.m. until Sunday at 5:00
p.m. Additionally, on those other weekends when Father is available
and the parties can agree, Mother will provide Father with periods of
additional temporary custody with the minor child.
Alternating holidays to include Now Year's Day, Easter, Memorial Day,
July 4th, Labor Day end Thanksgiving. The Father shall have custody of
the minor child in odd numbered years for New Year's, Memorial Day
and Labor Day, with the Mother having custody of the minor child in odd
numbered years on Easter, July 4th and Thanksgiving. The parties will
alternate years thereafter.
For the Christmas holiday, the holiday shall be divided into two
2. The father now pays support for Abby.
-2-
,e% , .
88-2868 CIVIL TERM
segments from December 24th at noon until December 25th at noon,
and from December 25th at noon until December 26th at noon. These
two segments shall be alternated between the partles, with the Mother
enjoying the first segment on the Christmas holiday of 1996.
The Father shall always have custody of the minor child on Father's Day,
and the Mother shall always have custody on Mother's Day. This
provision to supersede any other custody provision outlined above.
In July, 1996, the mother moved to Linglestown, Dauphin County, to live with
James Brenner whom she met in March, 1996. Abby continued to live with her
matemal grandparents In their home where she has lived since birth. The father did
not know that Abby was going to remain with her matemal grandparents when he
agreed to the custody order dated July 29, 1996. On October 7, 1996, the father filed
a petition to modify the custody order to award him primary physical custody since
Abby was living with her matemal grandparents and not her mother. The parents
agreed to a custody evaluation by Arnold T. Shienvold, Ph.D., a clinical psychologist.
Following a conciliation conference a temporary order was entered on August 5,
1997, that provides:
Pending further Order of this Court, this Court's prior Order of July 29,
1996 shall remain in effect subject to the following modifications:
A. Father's periods of temporary custody on alternating weekends
shall be expanded to Friday at 5:00 p.m. until Monday morning
when Father shall make arrangements for return of the child to
the Matemal Grandparents prior to Father going to work or at
another time that morning agreeable to the parties.
B. Father shall have additional periods of temporary custody at least
two times each week in accordance with the report of Dr.
Shienvold. In the event Father's work schedule is such that he
can coordinate an evening and morning off dudng'the week that
-3-
4^ 1
98-21388 CIVIL TERM
would be consecutive, then Father would be allowed an
opportunity to have the child on an evening overnight into the
following morning mid-week. Father shall notify the Maternal
Grandparents on Thursday of each week as to when he intends
to exercise weekday visitation with the minor child the following
week.
Depending on the father's work schedule, he has Abby for an additional overnight
stays during each week. He or a member of his family picks up and returns her to
her maternal grandparents' home for all his periods of temporary physical custody.*
A hearing on the merits of the father's petition to modify the custody order was
conducted on September 15, 1997. The court granted a petition of the maternal
grandparents to be joined as defendants, The Legislature has provided at 23 Pa.C.S.
Section 5313(b) for those circumstances under which a grandparent may seek
physical and legal custody of their grandchild. The Section provides:
(b) Physical and legal custody.-A grandparent has standing to
bring a petition for physical and legal custody of a grandchild. If It Is in
the best interest of the child not to be In the custody of either parent and
if it is in the best interest of the child to be in the custody of the
grandparent, the court may award physical and legal custody to the
grandparent. This subsection applies to a grandparent:
(1) who has genuine care and concern for the child;
(2) whose relationship with the child began with the consent of a
parent of the child or pursuant to an order of court; and
(3) who for 12 months has assumed the role and responsibilities
of the child's parent, providing for the physical, emotional and social
needs of the child ...
3. The maternal grandmother's home in Camp Hill is approximately a twenty
minute drive from the father's home in Boiling Springs. It takes about the same
amount of time to drive from the maternal grandmother's home to the mother's home
In Linglestown.
-4-
A^ -
98.2888 CIVIL TERM
In Ellerbe v. Hooks, 490 Pa. 383 (1980), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
adopted the standard of review in a custody contest between a parent and a third
party set forth In In Re Hernandez, 249 Pa. Super. 274 (1977), as follows:
[P]arents have a 'prima facie right to custody,' which 'may be
forfeited if convincing reasons appear that the best interests of the
child will be served by awarding custody to someone else.' .. .
[T]he Superior Court, through Judge Spaeth, articulated the
following approach;
'When the judge is hearing a dispute between the parents,
or a parent, and a third party, ... [t]he question still is,
what is in the child's best interest? However, the parties
do not start out even; the parents have a 'prima facie right
to custody,' which will be forfeited only if 'convincing
reasons' appear that the child's best interest will be served
by an award to the third party. Thus, even before the
proceedings start, the evidentiary scale is tipped, and
tipped hard, to the parents' side....
We agree that this approach is appropriate. Clearly these
principles do not preclude an award of custody to the non-parent.
Rather they simply Instruct the hearing judge that the non-parent
bears the burden of production and the burden of persuasion and
that the non-parent's burden is heavy.
Thus where circumstances do not clearly indicate the
appropriateness of awarding custody to a non-parent, we believe
the less intrusive and hence the proper course is to award
custody to the parent or parents.
In Rowles v. Rowles, 542 Pa. 443 (1995), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
reexamined the appropriate standard of proof in custody disputes between a parent
and a non-parent. The Opinion Announcing the Judgment of the Court sought to
abandon the presumption in favor of the parent in such cases, That opinion,
.5-
h , . ,. .
W2888 CIVIL TERM
supported by three out of six Justices, stated:
'By clearly eliminating the presumption per se, and mandating that
custody be determined by a preponderance of evidence, weighing
parenthood as a strong factor for consideration, custody proceedings
would be disentangled from the burden of applying a presumption that
merely beclouds the ultimate concern in these cases: the determination
of what affiliation will best serve the child's interests, Including physical,
emotional, intellectual, moral, and spiritual well-being....' [w]e now
abandon the presumption that a parent has a prima facie right to
custody as against third parties .... Thus, there is no single overriding
factor; rather, courts should consider every fact relevant to the physical,
emotional, intellectual, moral, and spiritual well-being of a child.
Parenthood, though not paramount, will always be a factor of significant
weight.... '[t]he parent-child relationship should be considered to be
of importance in determining which custody arrangement is In the child's
best interest,' 'special weight' and 'deference' should be accorded the
parent-child relationship, and the relationship should not be disturbed
'without some showing of harm' or unless circumstances 'clearly Indicate
the appropriateness of awarding custody to a non-parent.' We adhere
to these principles, for, In general, parents have a deep, abiding
commitment to the well-being of their children. (Citations omitted.)
The three judges who concurred In the result in Rowles stated that they did
not share the belief that the presumption that a parent has a prima facie right to
custody as against third parties should be abolished. As the Superior Court of
Pennsylvania noted In J.A.L. Y. E.P.H., _ Pa. Super. _, 882 A.2d 1314 (1998), the
plurality opinion of Rowles is not binding upon the Superior Court or the trial courts.
The Superior Court then stated in footnote two "[m]oreover, even if the position
espoused by the lead opinion in Rowles becomes law, the more flexible standard
employed In that case would still grant some special protection to the parent in
custody disputes with non-parents."
In the case ski i du ice, the mother's fiancee and the maternal grandmother
-8-
_w
4^0 -
tad-2988 CIVIL TERM
.r
work at the same McDonalds with the mother. During periods of time that Abby Is
not with her father, either the mother, her fiancee, or the maternal grandmother have
her. No baby-sitters are used. At times when the mother is not working, during the
day she takes her son Michael to her parents' home to be with Abby. On most days
when Abby Is not with her father, the mother is with her, sometimes up to nine hours.
On Thursday of each week, the father receives his work schedule for the following
week. He then coordinates his schedule with the maternal grandmother so that she
can make up the schedule for the next week consistent with his award of temporary
physical custody.' The complicated schedule insures that either the maternal
grandmother, the mother, the mother's fiancee or the father are with Abby and that
one of those persons, excluding the father herein, are with Michael. This arrangement
works, although the father complains that he does not get Abby for as much
additional time as he would like to have her. The father essentially has Abby during
periods of time when he is not working, If the father were to have primary physical
custody, he would use a baby-sitter for Abby during periods of time that he is working
and his parents are unable to care for her. Both paternal grandparents have day time
weekday jobs.
Dr. Shlenvold found Abby to be happy, well-adjusted and meeting all
developmental goals. His opinion is that it is not in the best interest of Abby to
4. There is little direct communication between the father and mother although
their joint efforts have served Abby's best interests.
.7.
All .
9&2888 CIVIL TERM
abruptly change primary physical custody from "one family to another." He basis his
opinion on the developmental needs of Abby as a toddler for emotional security that
Is established by trust and stability provided by her caregivers. Abby has bonded to
both her mother and her maternal grandparents as a result of living In the home of
her maternal grandparents since birth. Because neither the father nor his parents had
any contact with Abby for the first seven months of her life until paternity was
established, the depth of Abby's relationship with them is not as strong as with the
members of the Butala household. Given the strong interest and care that the father
and his family have and provide for Abby, Dr. Shienvold believes that there will be
greater bonding with them as time passes. Since both parents are young and
Immature, Dr. Shienvold believes that the role of grandparents In Abby life has been
an Important factor in her stable development.
Dr. Shienvold questions whether the mother will stabilize her life to a point
where she is able to provide care for both her son Michael and Abby. Thus, he
believes that the time may come where the father should become the primary
custodian of Abby. However, Dr. Shienvold believes It is in the best interest of Abby
to maintain the current living arrangement along with an increase in time spent with
the father as provided for In the temporary custody order entered on August 5, 1997.
Dr. Shienvold believes that this arrangement will create greater security for Abby
during this critically important developmental stage of her life. The mother is now
spending as much time with Abby as the father. If the mother is unable to reach her
•8-
.h . ,
98-2888 CIVIL TERM
r .
goal of being able to care for Abby by the end of the summer of 1998, then Dr,
Shlenvold believes, assuming that the father's bonds with Abby have developed
further, that the period of transition will be sufficient for a change in primary physical
custody to the father without risking averse affects to the child.
Both parents love and provide good care to Abby as do both sets of
grandparents. However, neither parent has the means to care for Abby without the
secondary assistance of their respective parents. The father's goal is to establish a
separate household in which he can take care of Abby. No time frame Is apparent for
reaching that goal. The mother does not believe she can properly care of Abby In the
home in which she now lives. She believes that it will take up to a year before she
can obtain a home In which she could care for both Michael and Abby. To currently
change Abby's living arrangement would mean that some of the care now provided
by her maternal grandparents and her mother to whom she has more closely bonded
than with the father will be provided by a baby-sifter.
If ever there was wisdom in applying the standard of proof advanced by a
plurality of the Supreme Court in Rowles v. Rowles, this is the case. Rigid
definitions of primary, temporary and shared physical custody have already been
blurred by the parents and grandparents acting in the best interest of Abby. The
maternal grandparents do not view themselves as Abby's primary custodian despite
the fact that she stays overnight in their home when she is not with the father. They
defer to the mother for all major decisions regarding the care of Abby, Under the
-9-
98.2888 CIVIL TERM
.1
temporary custody order, the mother sees Abby as frequently as does the father.
While the mother strives to be Independent, it Is her work schedule and the care she
provides to her baby son that has resulted in her continuing to seek the assistance of
her parents for the care of Abby. It was the father's fault that he did not see Abby for
a fourth of her current life. During that period, there was no one to help the mother
other than her parents. Since Abby's birth, the maternal grandparents have had
genuine care and concern for her, their relationship with her has been with the
consent of the mother, and they have assumed a role and responsibility as a parent
In providing for her physical, emotional and social needs.
Although the recommendation of a psychologist are not binding on this court,
L.D. v. S.D., 291 Pa. Super. 589 (1981), we find the expert testimony of Dr. Shlenvold
to be persuasive on the non-advisability of changing the stable living arrangement of
Abby during this critical stage in her development. No relationship will be disturbed
by maintaining the status quo In the best interest of Abby. Considering the
parent/child relationship and the status of both the mother and the father along with
all of the factors set forth herein relating to the well-being of Abby, the following
shared legal and physical custody order is entered.
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 11F day of September, 1997, IT IS ORDERED:
(1) The orders of July 29, 1998 and August 5, 1997, ARE VACATED and
replaced with this order.
-10-
4? • .
96-2888 CIVIL TERM
(2) Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., and Christy M. Butala shall have shared legal
custody of their daughter, Abby L. Butala, born June 3, 1995.
(3) Abby L. Butala shall be with her mother and maternal grandparents except
when she Is with her father as follows:
(a) On alternating weekends from Friday evening at 5:00 p.m. until
Monday when he goes to work,
(b) Two other days during each week at times when he Is not working.
On his current work schedule If he Is working 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p,m.:
from after work until 8:00 p.m. If he Is working 2:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.:
from 9:00 a.m. until he goes to work. if these two days are back to
., back: for overnight until he goes to work the next day.
(c) On the alternating holidays of New Year's Day, Easter, Memorial
Day, July 4th, Labor Day and Thanksgiving with the holidays alternating
each year,
(4) In addition:
(a) The Christmas holiday shall be divided Into two segments from
December 24th at noon until December 25th at noon and from
December 25th at noon until December 28th at noon. The father having
the first segment for 1997 with the segments alternating each year.
(b) The father shall always have Abby on Father's Day and the mother
shall always have Mother's Day.
•11-
J
O
M a
°i EH Ix H .?
"` o a P, u ?a 4 1 h
I, w
uw '3
u a
H
moo uA w au o
-0UH oop W N yF a ?
00 V) 0 8Ea r4Q
`oF 0
u 4j a fi w
n a, 1 ro o r
H C% rd m
z 4) F-1
MC4 z F x04 o a
m
Iq,
IAW OFFICES
?,r IIAROLD S. IKWIA, r
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR.. IN 7'IIE COl1R1' OF COMMON PLEAS OF
Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
CHRIS'rY M. BRENNAN (formerly
Christy Butala), MICHAEL NO. 96 - 2868 CIVIL.
BUTALA and PATRICIA BUTALA,
Defendant IN CUSTODY
COURT ORDER
AND NOW, this 12-9 day of January, 1999, upon consideration of the attached Custody
Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows:
The parties shall submit themselves and the minor child to a custody evaluation to
be performed by Dr, Arnold Shienvold. Cost of this evaluation shall be paid by the
Father. However, the evaluation shall N. an independent evaluation with Dr.
Shienvold sharing the results of that evaluation with counsel for both parties. The
panics shall ensure that all interested adults, as determined by Dr. Shienvold, shall
be involved in the evaluation.
2. In the event Father files a petition, the Court will entertain a petition at a later date
with respect to any allocation of the costs of this evaluation to the effect that Father
desires Mother to pay some evaluation costs.
Upon the conclusion of the evaluation and in the event the parties are unable at that
time to reach an agreement on a custody order, either party may contact the Custody
Conciliator to have this case again scheduled for a Conciliation Conference.
4. Pending further order from this Court, the Court's order of September 23, 1997 shall
remain in effect.
cc: Harold S. Irwin, III, Esquire
Kathleen C. Daley, Esquire
c,byW i...a ,L4, Ila8l94. /
V A V
I
I
I
L,
I
I
1
fl. 1
I I
I I I
I • , r
r I
? I
I
I
II' I. ? ? I r ? I I ,
1?1 ? I I ? I I ,
I
I
I
I
1 1 C 1 r r r. I. r r
c0
l1- C')' 1 ? r r I
C CJY C;)
STEPHEN R. SENSENICII. JR.,
Plaintiff
CHRISTY M. BRENNAN (formerly
Christy Butala). MICIIAEI.
BUTAI.A and PATRICIA Bl1TAI.A,
Defendant
Prior Judge: Edgar B. Bayley
: IN THE. COURT OF COMMON PI,FAS OF
: CUMBERLANDCOUN'I'Y,PI:NNSYL.VANIA
CIVIL ACTION - I.AW
NO. 96 - 2868 CIVII.
IN CUSTODY
CONCILIATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY REPORT
IN ACCORDANCE. WITH THE CUMBERLAND COUNTY CIVIL. RULE OF PROCEDURE
1915.3-8(b), the undersigned Custody Conciliator submits the following report:
The pertinent information pertaining to the child who is the subject of this litigation is as
follows:
Abby I... Butala, bom June 3, 1995.
2. A Conciliation Conference was held on January 22, 1999, with the following individuals in
attendance:
The Father, Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., with his counsel, Harold S. Irwin, III, Esquire; and
the Mother, Christy M. Butala, with her parents, Michael Butala and Patricia Butala and
their counsel, Kathleen C. Daley, Esquire.
3. The parties were previously betbre the Court in September of 1997 at which time the Court
issued a order on Custody giving the Mother primary custody and the Father liberal periods
of temporary physical custody. The Courts prior order was based in large part upon the
Custody Evaluation performed by Dr. Arnold Shienvold, Father now petitions for primary
custody and suggests that circumstances are such that the child would be better off living
with the dad on a primary custodial basis. Upon the Conciliator's recommendation, the
Father is willing to have another evaluation performed and pay for the costs at this time.
Mother was unwilling to expend any funds for the costs of the evaluation. However.
Mother is willing to cooperate in the evaluation. Her Position with respect to costs is that
she feels the Father should pay for the evaluation because he is the moving party at this
particular time.
4, The Conciliator recommends an order in the form as attached.
t 4
DATE Hubert X. Gi y, Esquire
Custody C ciliator
I
Heather Z. Reynosa, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No. 81095
129 East Market Street
York, Pennsylvania 17401
Telephone (717) 846-8856
Fax (717) 846-3610
hreynosa@ghhslaw.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR.,
Plaintiff
V.
CHRISTY M. BRENNAN f/k/a
CHRISTY M. BUTALA,
MICHAEL BUTALA, and
PATRICIA BUTALA,
Defendants
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
CUSTODY
NO. 96-2868
PETITION FOR CIVIL CONTEMPT #P
AND
PETITION FOR MODIFICATION OF EXISTING ORDER FOR CUSTODY
AND NOW, TO WIT, this (;? day of October, 2009, comes the Plaintiff,
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR. (hereinafter "Petitioner" and/or "Father"), and by
his attorneys, Griest, Himes, Herrold, Schaumann, Ferro, LLP, Esquires, by Heather
Z. Reynosa, Esquire, and files the following Petition for Modification of Existing Order
for Custody and Petition for Civil Contempt and Special Relief as follows:
1.
The Petitioner is STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR., an adult individual who
GRIEST, HIMES, HERROLD,
SCHAUMANN, FERRO LLP
ATTO ys AT LA
129 EAST MAR" I'--
IRS, PENNSYLVANIA 17401
TE.LE-E (717) 846-88$6
currently resides at 17 Hope Drive, Boiling Springs, Cumberland County,
Pennsylvania 17007.
2.
The Defendants in this matter are CHRISTY M. BRENNAN f/k/a CHRISTY M.
BUTALA (hereinafter "Respondent Brennan" and/or "Mother"), an adult
individual whose current residence is unknown and MICHAEL BUTALA and
PATRICIA BUTALA (hereinafter "Respondents M. Butala and P. Butala" and/or
the "Maternal Grandmother" and/or "Maternal Grandfather" and/or "Maternal
Grandparents"), adult individuals who currently reside at 5 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill,
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17011.
3.
The Petitioner is the natural parent of one minor child: ABBY L. BUTALA
(hereinafter "Child"), born June of 1995, age fourteen (14) years.
4.
Respondent Brennan is the natural parent of this Child.
5.
Respondent M. Butala and Respondent P. Butala are the Maternal
Grandparents of the Child.
6.
On or about September 23, 1997, the Honorable Edgar B. Bayley entered an
GRIEST, Hms, HERROLD,
SCHAUMANN, FERRO LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
129 EAST MARKET' STREET
YORK, PENNSYLVANIA 17401
TELEPHONE (717) 8468856
Opinion and Order of Court with respect to the custody of this Child. See copy of IN
RE: CUSTODY OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT dated September 23, 1997
attached hereto and made a part hereof as Petitioner's Exhibit "A"
7.
Specifically, the Opinion and Order of Court dated September 23, 1997
provided that Mother and Father shall have shared legal custody of the Child. With
respect to physical custody, it was ordered that the Child would be with Mother and
Maternal Grandparents except for Father's rights of partial physical custody as
specifically set forth therein. See Petitioner's Exhibit "A":
8.
Since that time, Petitioner has attempted to exercise the rights of partial
physical custody granted to him under that Opinion and Order, however, due to both
the actions of the Mother and the Maternal Grandparents, Father has had increasing
difficulties exercising the specific rights granted to him pursuant to the September
1997 Order.
9.
Specifically, Petitioner believes and therefore avers as follows:
A. Although the Court granted Mother and Father shared legal
custody of the Child, Father is not consulted when the Child is taken to medical
appointments;
6. Although the Court granted Mother and Father shared legal
custody of the Child, Father has not been advised of the Child's present medical
insurance coverage and has not been provided with medical cards for the Child if
such exist;
C. Although the Court granted Mother and Father shared legal
custody of the Child, Father was not consulted and/or advised about the fact that the
Child needed braces and that braces were going to be put on the teeth of the Child;
D. Although the Court granted Mother and Father shared legal
DRIEST. HIMES. HERROLD.
SCNAUMANN. FERRO LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
129 EASE MARKET STR-
YORK, PENNSYLVANIA 17401
nLEPNONE(717) 846-8856
custody of the Child, Father was not given and has not seen the Child's final report
card from school year 2008/2009;
E. Although the Court granted Mother and Father shared legal
custody of the Child, Father was not given the opportunity to know about and/or
purchase school pictures of the Child;
F. Although the Court granted Mother and Father shared legal
custody of the Child, Father was informed by the Child that the Maternal
Grandparents changed the school of the Child and the Child has now been enrolled
and is attending East Pennsboro Area School District for the 2009/2010 school year;
G. Although the Court granted Mother and Father shared legal
custody of the Child, Maternal Grandparents enrolled the Child and signed the Child
up for extra-curricular activities without consulting Father and without informing him of
when those activities occur;
H. Although the Court granted Mother and Father shared legal
custody of the Child, Father believes and therefore avers that the Child was
confirmed in the Catholic faith; however, he was not told about the confirmation until
the day before the confirmation was to occur and was not consulted regarding this
decision; and
1. Although the Court granted Mother and Father shared legal
custody of the Child, Mother and Maternal Grandparents have in fact totally excluded
Father with respect to legal custody rights concerning the Child.
10.
Moreover, as the September 1997 Opinion and Order clearly sets forth, Father
GRIEST, HIMES, HERROLD,
SCNAUMANN, FERRO LLP
ATTORNEYS AT L-
129 EASE MARKET STREET'
YORR, PENNSYLVANIA 17401
TELEPHONE (717) 846-8856
believes and therefore avers that the legal custody rights of the Child were and are to
be between the Mother and the Father; however, again through both the Mother's
actions and the Maternal Grandparent's actions, the Maternal Grandparents appear
to have assumed almost a sole legal custody status with respect to this Child.
11.
In fact, it is believed and therefore averred by Father that the Maternal
Grandparents have been claiming the Child for tax purposes.
12.
Therefore, due to the willful actions of both Mother and the Maternal
Grandparents, Father respectfully asserts that these parties have acted in willful and
malicious disregard of the governing Opinion and Order.
13.
To this end, Father requests that this Honorable Court find Mother and
Maternal Grandparents in contempt, award attorney's fees, and provide any and all
other relief deemed appropriate.
WHEREFORE, Father respectfully requests that Mother and Maternal
Grandparents be found in willful and malicious contempt of this Court's Order.
Paragraphs one through nine (1-13) are hereby incorporated by reference as if
more fully set forth at length hereinafter.
14.
Next, with respect to the physical custody provisions of the September 1997
GRIEST, HIMES, HERROLD,
SCNAUMANN, FERRO LLP
ATTORNEYS' L-
129 EAST M-11 STREET
YORK, PENNSYLVANIA 17401
TELEV - (717) 8468856
Opinion and Order of the Honorable Edgar B. Bayley, Father believes and therefore
avers that Mother and/or the Maternal Grandparents have again willfully and
maliciously violated the Court's Order.
15.
Specifically, Father avers as follows:
A. Specifically, within the Order of Court of September of 1997,
paragraph three (3), subsection B provides that Father shall have "[t]wo other days
during each week at times when he is not working." Father is not being permitted to
exercise two (2) other days during each week at times when he is not working to
spend time with the Child and Father has not been permitted on a regular basis to
exercise two (2) days during each week since the entry of the Order;
B. Father was scheduled to have the July 4, 2008 holiday pursuant
to the alternating schedule found in paragraph three (3) subsection C of the Order of
Court of September 1997; however, prior to July 4, 2008, Mother took the Child to
New York without Father's knowledge and then when contacted by Father, Mother
indicated that Father could come retrieve the Child in New York or meet her half way
on July 4, 2008. Also, Mother neither offered nor awarded Father any make up time
for this missed holiday; and
C. It is believed and therefore averred that Father was entitled to
exercise a period of partial physical custody on Labor Day of 2009 pursuant to the
1997 Order, but Father was not permitted to have the Child and denied such period
of partial physical custody.
16.
Father believes and therefore avers that both the actions of Mother and
GRIEST. FAMES. HERROLD.
SCHAUMANN. FERRO LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
129 EAST MARKET STREET
YORK, P-Syl-, 17401
TELEPMNE(717) 846-8856
Maternal Grandparents have been willful and malicious in failing to follow the physical
custody provisions of the Order of September of 1997.
17.
Due to the actions of Mother and Maternal Grandparents, Father respectfully
asserts that they are in willful and malicious violation of the governing Order.
18.
To this end, Father requests that this Honorable Court find Mother and
Maternal Grandparents in contempt, award attorney's fees, and provide any and all
other relief deemed appropriate.
WHEREFORE, Father respectfully requests that Mother and Maternal
Grandparents be found in willful and malicious contempt of this Court's Order.
Paragraphs one through thirteen (1-18) are hereby incorporated by reference
as if more fully set forth at length hereinafter.
19.
As set forth more specifically above, Father believes and therefore avers that
he has and continues to be prevented from playing a significant part in the Child's
life.
20.
To this end, Father respectfully requests that the Opinion and Order of Court
of September 1997 be modified providing him with primary and/or equally shared
physical custody.
21.
Father supports this request as it is his belief and understanding that Mother
GRIM, HIMEB, HERROLD,
SCHAUMANN, FERRO LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
129 EAST MARKET STREET
YORK, PENNSYLVANIA 17401
T--NE (717) 846-8856
does not play an active role in the Child's life with respect to physical custody and
that in fact, Mother may have only seen the child five (5) times to date in the year
2009.
22.
Additionally, pursuant to established case precedent, Father believes and
therefore avers that as the other biological parent, his rights of physical and legal
custody should take priority over those of the Maternal Grandparents.
23.
Moreover, due to the conduct permitted by Mother and the actions taken by
the Maternal Grandparents, Father believes and therefore avers that he is the parent
more likely to foster a relationship between the Child and the other parent and
extended family.
24.
In particular, Father has requested numerous times to talk to and see the Child
that have been "unanswered" and/or denied specifically by the Maternal
Grandparents.
25.
Further, Father is presently on leave from work and has time available to be
with and care for the Child; however, the Maternal Grandparents have not even
permitted the limited rights of partial custody as awarded pursuant to the Court's
Opinion and Order of September 1997.
26.
Also, Father is permitted four (4) weeks of vacation through his employer, but
GUEST. HIMES. HERROLD.
SCHAUMANN. FERRO LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
129 EAST MARKET STREET
YORK, P'P-SYLVAMA 17401
TELEPHONF(717) 846-8856
has not been able to exercise vacation with the Child during the Summer of 2008 or
the Summer of 2009.
27.
Most recently, Father requested a vacation period with the Child commencing
on Saturday, August 1, 2009, and ending on August 9, 2009; however, Mother called
and said that Father may not exercise such time with the Child and Father was
denied this extended period of time with the Child.
28.
Father has also not been allowed to see the Child or spend time with the Child
on her birthday since her Fifth (5th) Birthday.
29.
Also, Father has requested to see and spend time with the Child for extended
periods of time during her breaks from school; however, such requests have gone
"unanswered" and/or have been denied by the Maternal Grandparents.
30.
Also, with respect to transportation, Father is requesting that the transportation
be shared as presently he is responsible for all transportation when he is able to see
the Child.
31.
Father believes and therefore avers that both Mother and the Maternal
Grandparents have acted in concert to exclude Father from any regular and
meaningful contact with the Child.
32.
Father believes and therefore avers that it is in the best interest of the Child
GRIEST. HIMES. HERROLD.
SCDAUMANN, FERRO LLP
ATTORNEYS AT L-
129 EAST MAR- STREer
YORK, PENNSYLVANIA 17401
T ME-NE (717) 846-8856
that if her Mother is not going to be involved in her life that Father should have the
maximum amount of time with the Child as is available.
33.
Father believes and therefore avers that the bond between Father and Child
should be allowed to be continued and that such bond should be encouraged as the
relationship between the child and her parent is very important to the best interest
and overall welfare of the Child in question.
34.
Father believes and therefore avers that when Mother and/or the Maternal
Grandparents do now allow the Child to have a regular and meaningful relationship
with her Father, this also harms the Child's relationships with any of Father's
extended family members which is not in the Child's best interest and overall
permanent welfare.
WHEREFORE, for all of the reasons as set forth above, Father respectfully
requests that he be awarded shared legal custody with Mother and/or sole legal
custody if Mother is not taking an active role in the Child's life; and with respect to
physical custody, that he be awarded primary physical custody or at least equally
shared physical custody as it is believed that such is in the best interest and overall
welfare of the Child in question.
Respectfully submitted,
GRES , RIMES, HERROLD,
SCHAU ANN, FERRO, L P
BY•
GRIEST, HIMES, HERROLD,
SCHAUMANN, FERRO LLP
AT ORNEYS AT LAW
129 EAST MARKET S""`
YORK, PENNSYLVANIA 17401
T-PHONE (717) 846-9856
HEAqTgER Z. REYNOSA,'ES??JIRE
I.D. #81095 ((
129 East Market Street
York, Pennsylvania 17401
Telephone (717) 846-8856
Fax (717) 846-3610
hreynosa@ghhslaw.com
Attorney for Petitioner/Father
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
CHRISTY M. BUTALA,
MICHAEL BUTALA AND
PATRICIA BUTALA,
DEFENDANTS 96-2868 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: CUSTODY
OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
BAYLEY, J., September 23,1997:--
Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., age 24, and Christy Butala, age 22, are the parents
of Abby L. Butala, age 2, born June 3, 1995. Neither parent has married. The father
lives in the home of his parents in which his sister also resides in Boiling Springs.
The mother lives with her fiancee, James Brenner, their five and one-half year old son
Michael Brenner, and a male friend of her fiancee, in Linglestown.' Abby lives in the
home of her maternal grandparents, Michael Butala and Patricia Butala, in Camp Hill.
The father is a meat cutter at Karns Food in Boiling Springs where he has
worked for six years. He works shifts of either 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. or 2:00 p.m. to
10:00 p.m. five days a week. The days vary although he rarely works on Sunday. He
work most Saturdays. The mother is a swing manager at a McDonalds restaurant.
She works 38 to 48 hours a week on an irregular schedule of 4:45 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.
or later, or 3:30 p.m. to midnight or later.
1. The home is owned by Brenner's mother who does not live
96-2888 CIVIL TERM
The mother and father began seeing each other while in college around the
beginning of 1994. They broke up in September, 1994, at a time when the mother
did not know she was pregnant. The mother told the father of her pregnancy in
October, 1994, but the father did not believe that the child was his. When Abby was
born, the mother was living in the home of her parents in Camp Hill. The mother
instituted support proceedings against the father. Blood tests were obtained which
convinced the father that Abby was his child.2 The father began seeing Abby in
January, 1996. The initial contact between the father and his daughter developed into
seeing each other every other weekend and occasionally some other days. On May
24, 1996, the father filed a complaint for partial physical custody of Abby. On July 29,
1996, a consent order was entered that provided both parents with shared legal
custody and the mother with primary physical custody of Abby. The father's periods
of temporary physical custody were:
On alternating weekends from Friday at 5:00 p.m. until Sunday at 5:00
p.m. Additionally, on those other weekends when Father is available
and the parties can agree, Mother will provide Father with periods of
additional temporary custody with the minor child.
Alternating holidays to include New Year's Day, Easter, Memorial Day,
July 4th, Labor Day and Thanksgiving. The Father shall have custody of
the minor child in odd numbered years for New Year's, Memorial Day
and Labor Day, with the Mother having custody of the minor child in odd
numbered years on Easter, July 4th and Thanksgiving. The parties will
alternate years thereafter.
For the Christmas holiday, the holiday shall be divided into two
2. The father now pays support for Abby.
-2-
96-2868 CIVIL TERM
segments from December 24th at noon until December 25th at noon,
and from December 25th at noon until December 26th at noon. These
two segments shall be alternated between the parties, with the Mother
enjoying the first segment on the Christmas holiday of 1996.
The Father shall always have custody of the minor child on Father's Day,
and the Mother shall always have custody on Mother's Day. This
provision to supersede any other custody provision outlined above.
In July, 1996, the mother moved to Linglestown, Dauphin County, to live with
James Brenner whom she met in March, 1996. Abby continued to live with her
maternal grandparents in their home where she has lived since birth. The father did
not know that Abby was going to remain with her maternal grandparents when he
agreed to the custody order dated July 29, 1996. On October 7, 1996, the father filed
a petition to modify the custody order to award him primary physical custody since
Abby was living with her maternal grandparents and not her mother. The parents
agreed to a custody evaluation by Arnold T. Shienvold, Ph.D., a clinical psychologist.
Following a conciliation conference a temporary order was entered on August 5,
1997, that provides:
Pending further Order of this Court, this Court's prior Order of July 29,
1996 shall remain in effect subject to the following modifications:
A. Father's periods of temporary custody on alternating weekends
shall be expanded to Friday at 5:00 p.m. until Monday morning
when Father shall make arrangements for return of the child to
the Maternal Grandparents prior to Father going to work or at
another time that morning agreeable to the parties.
B. Father shall have additional periods of temporary custody at least
two times each week in accordance with the report of Dr.
Shienvold. In the event Father's work schedule is such that he
can coordinate an evening and morning off during the week that
-3-
96-2868 CIVIL TERM
would be consecutive, then Father would be allowed an
opportunity to have the child on an evening overnight into the
following morning mid-week. Father shall notify the Maternal
Grandparents on Thursday of each week as to when he intends
to exercise weekday visitation with the minor child the following
week.
Depending on the father's work schedule, he has Abby for an additional overnight
stays during each week. He or a member of his family picks up and returns her to
her maternal grandparents' home for all his periods of temporary physical custody,*
A hearing on the merits of the father's petition to modify the custody order was
conducted on September 15, 1997. The court granted a petition of the maternal
grandparents to be joined as defendants. The Legislature has provided at 23 Pa.C.S.
Section 5313(b) for those circumstances under which a grandparent may seek
physical and legal custody of their grandchild. The Section provides:
(b) Physical and legal custody.--A grandparent has standing to
bring a petition for physical and legal custody of a grandchild. If it is in
the best interest of. the child not to be in the custody of either parent and
if it is in the best interest of the child to be in the custody of the
grandparent, the court may award physical and legal custody to the
grandparent. This subsection applies to a grandparent:
(1) who has genuine care and concern for the child;
(2) whose relationship with the child began with the consent of a
parent of the child or pursuant to an order of court; and
(3) who for 12 months has assumed the role and responsibilities
of the child's parent, providing for the physical, emotional and social
needs of the child ...
3. The maternal grandmother's home in Camp Hill is approximately a twenty
minute drive from the father's home in Boiling Springs. It takes about the same
amount of time to drive from the maternal grandmother's home to the mother's home
in Linglestown.
-4-
96-2868 CIVIL TERM
In Ellerbe v. Hooks, 490 Pa. 363 (1980), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
adopted the standard of review in a custody contest between a parent and a third
party set forth in In Re Hernandez, 249 Pa. Super. 274 (1977), as follows:
[P]arents have a 'prima facie right to custody,' which 'may be
forfeited if convincing reasons appear that the best interests of the
child will be served by awarding custody to someone else.' .. .
[T]he Superior Court, through Judge Spaeth, articulated the
following approach:
'When the judge is hearing a dispute between the parents,
or a parent, and a third party.... [t]he question still is,
what is in the child's best interest? However, the parties
do not start out even; the parents have a 'prima facie right
to custody,' which will be forfeited only if 'convincing
reasons' appear that the child's best interest will be served
by an award to the third party. Thus, even before the
proceedings start, the evidentiary scale is tipped, and
tipped hard, to the parents' side....
We agree that this approach is appropriate. Clearly these
principles do not preclude an award of custody to the non-parent.
Rather they simply instruct the hearing judge that the non-parent
bears the burden of production and the burden of persuasion and
that the non-parent's burden is heavy.
Thus where circumstances do not clearly indicate the
appropriateness of awarding custody to a non-parent, we believe
the less intrusive and hence the proper course is to award
custody to the parent or parents.
In Rowles v. Rowles, 542 Pa. 443 (1995), the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
reexamined the appropriate standard of proof in custody disputes between a parent
and a non-parent. The Opinion Announcing the Judgment of the Court sought to
abandon the presumption in favor of the parent in such cases. That opinion,
-5-
96-2868 CIVIL TERM
supported by three out of six Justices, stated:
'By clearly eliminating the presumption per se, and mandating that
custody be determined by a preponderance of evidence, weighing
parenthood as a strong factor for consideration, custody proceedings
would be disentangled from the burden of applying a presumption that
merely beclouds the ultimate concern in these cases: the determination
of what affiliation will best serve the child's interests, including physical,
emotional, intellectual, moral, and spiritual well-being....' [w]e now
abandon the presumption that a parent has a prima facie right to
custody as against third parties .... Thus, there is no single overriding
factor; rather, courts should consider every fact relevant to the physical,
emotional, intellectual, moral, and spiritual well-being of a child.
Parenthood, though not paramount, will always be a factor of significant
weight.... '[t]he parent-child relationship should be considered to be
of importance in determining which custody arrangement is in the child's
best interest,' 'special weight' and 'deference' should be accorded the
parent-child relationship, and the relationship should not be disturbed
'without some showing of harm' or unless circumstances 'clearly indicate
the appropriateness of awarding custody to a non-parent.' We adhere
to these principles, for, in general, parents have a deep, abiding
commitment to the well-being of their children. (Citations omitted.)
The three judges who concurred in the result in Rowles stated that they did
not share the belief that the presumption that a parent has a prima facie right to
custody as against third parties should be abolished. As the Superior Court of
Pennsylvania noted in J.A.L. v. E.P.H., _, Pa. Super. _, 682 A.2d 1314 (1996), the
plurality opinion of Rowles is not binding upon the Superior Court or the trial courts.
The Superior Court then stated in footnote two "[m]oreover, even if the position
espoused by the lead opinion in Rowles becomes law, the more flexible standard
employed in that case would still grant some special protection to the parent in
custody disputes with non-parents."
In the case sub iudice, the mother's fiancee and the maternal grandmother
-6-
96-2868 CIVIL TERM
work at the same McDonalds with the mother. During periods of time that Abby is
not with her father, either the mother, her fiancee, or the maternal grandmother have
her. No baby-sitters are used. At times when the mother is not working, during the
day she takes her son Michael to her parents' home to be with Abby. On most days
when Abby is not with her father, the mother is with her, sometimes up to nine hours.
On Thursday of each week, the father receives his work schedule for the following
week. He then coordinates his schedule with the maternal grandmother so that she
can make up the schedule for the next week consistent with his award of temporary
physical custody.' The complicated schedule insures that either the maternal
grandmother, the mother, the mother's fiancee or the father are with Abby and that
one of those persons, excluding the father herein, are with Michael. This arrangement
works, although the father complains that he does not get Abby for as much
additional time as he would like to have her. The father essentially has Abby during
periods of time when he is not working. If the father were to have primary physical
custody, he would use a baby-sitter for Abby during periods of time that he is working
and his parents are unable to care for her. Both paternal grandparents have day time
weekday jobs.
Dr. Shienvold found Abby to be happy, well-adjusted and meeting all
developmental goals. His opinion is that it is not in the best interest of Abby to
4. There is little direct communication between the father and mother although
their joint efforts have served Abby's best interests.
-7-
96-2868 CIVIL TERM
abruptly change primary physical custody from "one family to another." He basis his
opinion on the developmental needs of Abby as a toddler for emotional security that
is established by trust and stability provided by her care-givers. Abby has bonded to
both her mother and her maternal grandparents as a result of living in the home of
her maternal grandparents since birth. Because neither the father nor his parents had
any contact with Abby for the first seven months of her life until paternity was
established, the depth of Abby's relationship with them is not as strong as with the
members of the Butala household. Given the strong interest and care that the father
and his family have and provide for Abby, Dr. Shienvold believes that there will be
greater bonding with them as time passes. Since both parents are young and
immature, Dr. Shienvold believes that the role of grandparents in Abby life has been
an important factor in her stable development.
Dr. Shienvold questions whether the mother will stabilize her life to a point
where she is able to provide care for both her son Michael and Abby. Thus, he
believes that the time may come where the father should become the primary
custodian of Abby. However, Dr. Shienvold believes it is in the best interest of Abby
to maintain the current living arrangement along with an increase in time spent with
the father as provided for in the temporary custody order entered on August 5, 1997.
Dr. Shienvold believes that this arrangement will create greater security for Abby
during this critically important developmental stage of her life. The mother is now
spending as much time with Abby as the father. If the mother is unable to reach her
-8-
96-2868 CIVIL TERM
goal of being able to care for Abby by the end of the summer of 1998, then Dr.
Shienvold believes, assuming that the father's bonds with Abby have developed
further, that the period of transition will be sufficient for a change in primary physical
custody to the father without risking averse affects to the child.
Both parents love and provide good care to Abby as do both sets of
grandparents. However, neither parent has the means to care for Abby without the
secondary assistance of their respective parents. The father's goal is to establish a
separate household in which he can take care of Abby. No time frame is apparent for
reaching that goal. The mother does not believe she can properly care of Abby in the
home in which she now lives. She believes that it will take up to a year before she
can obtain a home in which she could care for both Michael and Abby. To currently
change Abby's living arrangement would mean that some of the care now provided
by her maternal grandparents and her mother to whom she has more closely bonded
than with the father will be provided by a baby-sitter.
If ever there was wisdom in applying the standard of proof advanced by a
plurality of the Supreme Court in Rowles v. Rowles, this is the case. Rigid
definitions of primary, temporary and shared physical custody have already been
blurred by the parents and grandparents acting in the best interest of Abby. The
maternal grandparents do not view themselves as Abby's primary custodian despite
the fact that she stays overnight in their home when she is not with the father. They
defer to the mother for all major decisions regarding the care of Abby. Under the
-9-
96-2868 CIVIL TERM
temporary custody order, the mother sees Abby as frequently as does the father.
While the mother strives to be independent, it is her work schedule and the care she
provides to her baby son that has resulted in her continuing to seek the assistance of
her parents for the care of Abby. It was the father's fault that he did not see Abby for
a fourth of her current life. During that period, there was no one to help the mother
other than her parents. Since Abby's birth, the maternal grandparents have had
genuine care and concern for her, their relationship with her has been with the
consent of the mother, and they have assumed a role and responsibility as a parent
in providing for her physical, emotional and social needs.
Although the recommendation of a psychologist are not binding on this court,
L.D. v. B.D., 291 Pa. Super. 589 (1981), we find the expert testimony of Dr. Shienvold
to be persuasive on the non-advisability of changing the stable living arrangement of
Abby during this critical stage in her development. No relationship will be disturbed
by maintaining the status quo in the best interest of Abby. Considering the
parent/child relationship and the status of both the mother and the father along with
all of the factors set forth herein relating to the well-being of Abby, the following
shared legal and physical custody order is entered.
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this V day of September, 1997, IT IS ORDERED:
(1) The orders of July 29, 1996 and August 5, 1997, ARE VACATED and
replaced with this order.
-10-
96-2868 CIVIL TERM
(2) Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., and Christy M. Butala shall have shared legal
custody of their daughter, Abby L. Butala, born June 3, 1995.
(3) Abby L. Butala shall be with her mother and maternal grandparents except
when she is with her father as follows:
(a) On alternating weekends from Friday evening at 5:00 p.m. until
Monday when he goes to work.
(b) Two other days during each week at times when he is not working.
On his current work schedule if he is working 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.:
from after work until 8:00 p.m. If he is working 2:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.:
from 9:00 a.m. until he goes to work. If these two days are back to
back: for overnight until he goes to work the next day.
(c) On the alternating holidays of New Year's Day, Easter, Memorial
Day, July 4th, Labor Day and Thanksgiving with the holidays alternating
each year.
(4) In addition:
(a) The Christmas holiday shall be divided into two segments from
December 24th at noon until December 25th at noon and from
December 25th at noon until December 26th at noon. The father having
the first segment for 1997 with the segments alternating each year.
(b) The father shall always have Abby on Father's Day and the mother
shall always have Mother's Day.
-11-
96-2868 CIVIL TERM
(5) The parties shall cooperate in adjusting the pick up and delivery times on
this schedule as may be necessary to facilitate their work schedules.
Harold S. Irwin, III, Esquire
For the Father
Kathleen C. Daley, Esquire
For the Mother
saa
-12-
CUYt1r D. Dayicdy, J.
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
CHRISTY M. BUTALA,
MICHAEL BUTALA AND
PATRICIA BUTALA,
DEFENDANTS 96-2868 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 2I day of September, 1997, IT IS ORDERED:
(1) The orders of July 29, 1996 and August 5, 1997, ARE VACATED and
replaced with this order.
(2) Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., and Christy M. Butala shall have shared legal
custody of their daughter, Abby L. Butala, born June 3, 1995.
(3) Abby L. Butala shall be with her mother and maternal grandparents except
when she is with her father as follows:
(a) On alternating weekends from Friday evening at 5:00 p.m. until
Monday when he goes to work.
(b) Two other days during each week at times when he is not working.
On his current work schedule if he is working 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.:
from after work until 8:00 p.m. If he is working 2:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.:
from 9:00 a.m. until he goes to work. If these two days are back to
back: for overnight until he goes to work the next day.
(c) On the alternating holidays of New Year's Day, Easter, Memorial
Day, July 4th, Labor Day and Thanksgiving with the holidays alternating
each year.
(4) In addition:
(a) The Christmas holiday shall be divided into two segments from
December 24th at noon until December 25th at noon and from
December 25th -at noon until December 26th at noon. The father having
the first segment for 1997 with the segments alternating each year.
(b) The father shall always have Abby on Father's Day and the mother
shall always have Mother's Day.
(5) The parties shall cooperate in adjusting the pick up and delivery times on
this schedule as may be necessary to facilitate their work schedules.
By tho-G ,
Edgar S. Bayley, J.
Harold S. Irwin, III, Esquire
For the Father
(Cathleen C. Daley, Esquire
For the Mother
: saa
VERIFICATION
I, Heather Z. Reynosa, Esquire, on behalf of Plaintiff, whose verification could
not be timely obtained, do hereby verify that the statements made in this Petition for
Civil Contempt and Special Relief and Petition for Modification of Existing
Order for Custody are true and correct based upon information provided to me by
the Plaintiff. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the
penalties of 18 Pa. C. S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
RLED-40FTE
G AAA=. _ - ,, ? ,?' , t
v:r st,'
C-K .?c13
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
1996-2868 CIVIL ACTION LAW
CHRISTY M. BRENNAN F/K/A CHRISTY M.
BUTALA, MICHAEL BUTALA AND IN CUSTODY
PATRICIA BUTALA
DFT NDANT
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, Tuesday, October 13, 2009 , upon consideration of the attached Complaint,
it is hereby directed that parties and their respective counsel appear before Hubert X. Gilroy, Esq. , the conciliator,
at 4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle on Thursday, November 05, 2009 at 9:30 AM
for a Pre-Hearing Custody Conference. At such conference, an effort will be made to resolve the issues in dispute; or
if this cannot be accomplished, to define and narrow the issues to be heard by the court, and to enter into a temporary
order. Failure to appear at the conference may provide grounds for entry of a temporary or permanent order.
The court hereby directs the parties to furnish any and all existing Protection from Abuse orders,
Special Relief orders, and Custody orders to the conciliator 48 hours prior to scheduled hearing.
FOR THE COURT,
By: _ /s/ Hubert X. Gilroy, Es q.
Custody Conciliator
The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County is required by law to comply with the Americans
with Disabilites Act of 1990. For information about accessible facilities and reasonable accommodations
available to disabled individuals having business before the court, please contact our office. All arrangements
must be made at least 72 hours prior to any hearing or business before the court. You must attend the scheduled
conference or hearing.
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR ATTORNEY AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT
HAVE AN ATTORNEY OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET
FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP.
Cumberland County Bar Association
32 South Bedford Street
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
Telephone (717) 249-3166
a yr SI`vC_
T' P ^ { .R,?TAFY
2009 OCT 13 Phi 3: 4 1
r ?? ?? -elf-? .
-lee
Nov 0 9 2009 STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
VS. CIVIL ACTION - LAW
CHRISTY M. RACCUGLIA, F/K/A NO. 1996-2868
CHRISTY M. BUTALA, MICHAEL
BUTALA and PATRICIA BUTALA,
Defendants IN CUSTODY
COURT ORDER
AND NOW, this day of November, 2009, upon consideration of the attached
Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed that this Court's prior Order of September
23, 1997, is vacated and replaced with the following Order:
1. The father, Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., the mother, Christy M. Raccuglia, and the
maternal grandparents, Michael Butala and Patricia Butala, shall enjoy shared legal
and shared physical custody of Abby L. Butala, born June 3, 1995.
2. Physical custody shall be handled as follows:
A. During the summer months, the Father shall have custody on a week on/week
off basis with the Maternal Grandparents and Mother having custody the
other week.
B. During the school year, the following schedule shall apply:
(1) The child shall reside primarily with the Maternal Grandparents;
(2) Father shall have custody each week from Tuesday after school until
Thursday morning when the Father shall deliver the child to school;
(3) On alternating weekends from Friday at 5:00 p.m. until Monday
morning when Father shall deliver the child to school.
C. At such other times as agreed.
3. Holidays shall be handled as follows:
A. The parties shall alternate the holidays of New Year's Day, Easter, Memorial
Day, July 4`h, Labor Day and Thanksgiving. It is noted that for Thanksgiving
2009 the Mother/Maternal Grandparents shall enjoy that holiday with the
parties alternating thereafter consistent with their existing schedule.
B. The Mother shall always have Mother's Day. The Father shall always have
Father's Day.
C. The Christmas holiday shall be divided into two segments: Segment A shall
be from December 24 at noon until December 25 at noon and Segment B
shall be from December 25 at noon until December 26 at noon. It is noted
that consistent with the existing schedule, the Father has Segment A in 2009.
D. The Father shall also have custody over the Christmas holiday in 2009 from
December 26 at noon through New Year's Eve at noon.
4. The above Order is entered pursuant to an agreement reached by the parties at a
custody conciliation conference. In the event the parties desire to modify this Order
and the parties may agree, the parties shall abide by any agreement they reach
between themselves. Absent an agreement, the parties may petition the Court to have
the case again scheduled with the Custody Conciliator for a conference.
5. It is specifically authorized in this case for either party to contact the Custody
Conciliator in writing to request an expedited conciliation conference without the
need of filing a formal petition with the Court. Along these lines, it is noted that the
above schedule changes the child's weekday schedule for school during the school
year and Mother/Maternal Grandparents have concerns as to whether or not such a
change may be too disruptive for the minor child. That issue, along with any other
issues that may arise, can be addressed at a second conciliation conference in the
event either party makes such a request.
6. It is specifically noted that the school district where the minor child attends is hereby
authorized to provide all relevant information concerning the minor child to both
Parents and to the Maternal Grandparents consistent with the shared custody
arrangement of the parties under this Order.
cc: leather Z. Reynosa, Esquire
. Christy Raccuglia
,, r. & Mrs. Michael Butala
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR.,
Plaintiff
VS.
CHRISTY M. RACCUGLIA, F/K/A
CHRISTY M. BUTALA, MICHAEL
BUTALA and PATRICIA BUTALA,
Defendants
Prior Judge: The Honorable Edgar B. Bayley
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
: NO. 1996-2868
IN CUSTODY
CONCILIATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY REPORT
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CUMBERLAND COUNTY RULE OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE 1915.3-8(b), the undersigned Custody Conciliator submits the following report:
The pertinent information pertaining to the child who is the subject of this litigation
is as follows:
Abby L. Butala, born June 3, 1995
2. A Conciliation Conference was held on November 5, 2009, with the following
individuals in attendance:
The mother, Christy M. Raccuglia, and the maternal grandmother, Patricia Butala,
who appeared without counsel, and the father, Stephen R. Sensenich, Jr., with his
counsel, Heather Z. Reynosa, Esquire.
3. The parties agreed to the entry of an Order in the form as attached.
Date. November (/ ,2009 a? V 'Q
Hubert X. Gilroy
Custody Concijx
FtLEC--C)i K,,'E
OF THE IRPIRfTHCNOTAPY
2009 NOV 10 PM E : 4 4
NTY
Quintina M. Laudermilch, Esquire
DALEY ZUCKER MEILTON
MINER & GINGRICH, LLC
1029 Scenery Drive
Harrisburg, PA 17109
(717) 657-4795
tlaudermilchaa.dzmmR1aw.com
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR.,
Plaintiff Docket No. 1996-2868
V. CIVIL ACTION LAW
CHRISTY M. RACCUGLIA F/K/A/, (In Custody)
CHRISTY M. BRENNAN, MICHAEL
BUTALA AND PATRICIA BUTALA
Defendants
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL
This Motion of Quintina M. Laudermilch, Esquire, and Daley Zucker Meilton Miner &
Gingrich, LLC, respectfully represents:
1. The Movants are Quintina M. Laudermilch, Esquire, and Daley Zucker Meilton
Miner & Gingrich, LLC, who are presently counsel of record for Defendants, Christy M.
Raccuglia f/k/a Christy M. Brennan, Michael Butala and Patricia Butala, in the above-captioned
matter.
2. The Respondents are Christy M. Raccuglia, f/n/a Christy M. Brennan, Michael
Butala and Patricia Butala, Defendants in the above-captioned matter.
3. Movants have been counsel of record in these matters since in or around 1996.
4. Over the course of Movants' representation of Respondent, certain conflicts have
arisen with Michael and Patricia Butala which make it impossible for Movants to continue to
represent Respondent.
5. Therefore, under Rule 1.16(a)(1) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional
Conduct, Movants must withdraw as counsel in this case.
6. Respondent, Christy M. Raccuglia entered into a Fee Agreement with Movants,
when at that time Respondent paid for legal services and was fully aware that payment must be
made in the future for other services rendered; however, Respondent has not met her financial
obligations to Daley Zucker Meilton Miner & Gingrich, LLC.
7. After numerous requests by Movants, Respondent has yet to pay counsel fees in
this matter.
8. Respondents Christy M. Raccuglia and Michael and Patricia Butala have also
notified Movants that Respondents no longer wish to have Movants as counsel of record in the
above-referenced matter.
9. Therefore, under Rule 1.16(b)(5) and Rule 1.16(b)(6) of the Pennsylvania Rules
of Professional Conduct, good cause exists for Movants' withdrawal of appearance in this case.
10. As a result of the above, Movants accordingly request permission to withdraw as
counsel for Respondent.
WHEREFORE, Movants, Quintina M. Laudermilch, Esquire, and Daley Zucker Meilton
Miner & Gingrich, LLC, respectfully request this Honorable Court grant Movants leave to
Withdraw as Counsel for Respondent, Christy M. Raccuglia, Michael Butala and Patricia Butala
in the above-referenced Custody matter.
Respectfully Submitted,
DALEY ZUCKER MEILTON
MINER & GINGRICH, LLC
By:
uintina M. Laudermilch, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No. 94664
1029 Scenery Drive
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17109
(717) 657-4795
VERIFICATION
Upon my personal knowledge, information and belief, I, Quintina M.
Laudermilch, Esquire, do hereby verify that the facts averred and statements made in the
foregoing petition are true and correct. I understand that false statements or averments therein
made will subject me to the criminal penalties of 18 Pa C.S.A. §4904 relating to unworn
falsification to authorities.
Date: By .
uintina M. Laudermilch, Esquire
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
h
I, Amanda M. Shull, Paralegal, hereby certify that on this I t day of
NaueM 2009, a copy of the Motion for Leave to Withdraw as Counsel was placed
in the United States Mail, Postage pre-paid, with proof of mailing, addressed as follows:
Heather Z. Reynosa, Esquire,
Griest, Himes, Herrold, Schaumann, Ferro, LLP, Esquires,
129 East Market Street,
York, PA 17401
Counsel for Defendant
Ms. Christy M. Raccuglia
26 North Prince Street
Millersville, PA 17551
Michael and Patricia Butala
5 Hunter Lane
Camp Hill, PA 17011
DALEY ZUCKER MEILTON
MINER AND GINGRICH, LLC
By: 4m,?O "v 4&t&
Amanda M. Shull, Paralegal
1029 Scenery Drive
Harrisburg, PA 17109
(717) 657-4795
'?'+r+o?nr
OF
210*W 17 Mit 14
OA%;??
Quintina M. Laudermilch, Esquire
DALEY ZUCKER MEILTON
MINER & GINGRICH, LLC
1029 Scenery Drive
Harrisburg, PA 17109
(717) 657-4795
tlaudermilch(d4 mm0aw.com
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
STEPHEN R. SENSENICH, JR.,
Plaintiff Docket No. 1996-2868
V.
CIVIL ACTION LAW
CHRISTY M. RACCUGLIA F/K/A/, (In Custody)
CHRISTY M. BRENNAN, MICHAEL
BUTALA AND PATRICIA BUTALA
Defendants
ORDER
AND NOW, this 10( day of vlvp?k? 2009, upon consideration
of the Petition to Withdraw as Counsel, it is hereby ORDERED and DECREED that Quintina M.
Laudermilch, Esquire, and Daley Zucker Meilton Miner & Gingrich, LLC, are granted leave to
withdraw as counsel of record for the Defendants, Christy M. Raccuglia f/k/a Christy M.
Brennan, Michael Butala and Patricia Butala in the above-captioned matter.
, J.
Distribution:
eather Z. Reynosa, Esquire, , Esquires, 129 East Market
Street, York, Pennsylvania 17401 (717/846-8856)
,Ouintina M. Laudermilch, 1? ??? ?TT?Y> *?r** T?*1 * rn ,? ,4 c IINI K11 , ; , 1029 Scenery Drive,
H sburg, Pennsylvania 17109 (717/657-4795)
risty M. Raccuglia, 26 North Prince Street, Millersville, PA 17551
? ichael and Patricia Butala, 5 Hunter Lane, Camp Hill, PA 17011
RLED- AFICE
OF THE PR i ? DMTARY
2009 NOV 19 AN 11: 16
PENNSYLVANIA,