Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-0160ROBERT C. STUMPF, :IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff/Petitioner :CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. :NO. 03- ! (v CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant/ Respondent :CUSTODY PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF Petitioner, Robert C. Stumpf, by and through his counsel, Margaret M. Simok of MidPenn Legal Services, states the following: 1. Petitioner is the above-named Plaintiff, hereinafter referred to as the father, who currently resides at 10 George Circle, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County Pennsylvania 17055. 2. Respondent is the above-named Defendant, Pamela O'Brien, hereinafter referred to as the mother, whose current residence is unknown. To the best of the father's knowledge she is somewhere in Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. 3. The above-named parties are the natural parents of Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994, and Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991. 4. A Complaint for Custody was filed on contemporaneously with this Petition for Special Relief. 5. The mother is not acting in the children's best interests for reasons including, but not limited to, the following: i.) The mother removed the children from their home of three years on December 22, 2002. The father fears for the safety of the children because the mother refuses to tell him where she has taken the children. Furthermore, the mother has not taken sufficient clothing or school materials for the children. ii.) The mother has removed the children from the schools they have attended for the last three years. She has failed to enroll the children in any accredited school since January 6, 2002. iii.) The mother has refused to allow the children to have any physical contact with their father since December 22, 2002. iv) The mother has refused the children any telephone contact with the children since December 22, 2002. v.) The mother refuses to tell the father where the children are living or give him their telephone number. vi.) The mother had removed the children form their regular activities, including but not limited to Girl Scouts and their regularly scheduled religious education. vii.) Mother is currently on parole for a third DUI conviction, and the father fears that the mother could be incarcerated at any time for a violation of her parole since to the best of the father's knowledge the mother continues to drink which is a violation of her parole.. viii.) In spite of several requests by the father himself and through father's counsel, mother has not agreed to any visits of father with the children. 6. The father fears that the mother may be planning to have the children removed to the state of New York. The maternal grandmother of the children, Mary Lou Collins, is currently with the mother and maintains her permanent residence at 151 Oakland Avenue, Deer Park, New York. 7. The father has attempted to work with the mother for the sake of the child; he is the parent who can best facilitate contact with the other parent. 8. The father requests that the Court grant him primary custody of the children. 9. Without this Court's intervention, the children are at risk of being removed from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and of harm from being denied contact with their father and from having their education disrupted. ROBERT C. STUMPF IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. PAMELA O'BRIEN DEFENDANT 03-160 CIVIL ACTION LAW IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, Monday, August 08, 2005 , 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, September 15, 2005 at 10:30 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. All children age five or older may also be present at the conference. 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 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 /o -w- Av?J -S,-, 2 A0 /" AV' lew bIKb'AIASNr3d ,II.NrIM (INV*' 432VVVO 01 .Z Nd 6- 9ntl 9001 dbb101?'rUOdd 3H1 :10 30>d_40-018 WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the following: a. That the Court enter a Temporary Order granting primary custody of the child to the father. b. That the Court require the children be returned to school in the Mechanicsburg School district. c. That the police be directed to serve and enforce the order. Petitioner also requests any other relief this court deems just and proper. Respectfully submitted, rr?.-ry," Margaret M. Simok cne 9? ??,0 L S Attorney for Plaintiff/ Petitioner MIDPENN LEGAL SERVICES 8 Irving Row Carlisle, PA 17013 VERIFICATION The above named Plaintiff, Robert Stumpf, verifies that the statements made in the above Petition are true and correct. Plaintiff understands that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C. S. Sec. 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: 3 416ed 2=;y- Robert Stumpf ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, DEFENDANT 03-0160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this kd? day of January, 2003, upon consideration of the petition for special relief regarding the custody of Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994, and Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) Pamela O'Brien shall not remove nor cause the children to be removed from Dauphin or Cumberland Counties, in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania pending further order of court after conciliation. (2) A hearing shall be conducted in Courtroom Number 2, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania at 8:45 a.m., Friday, January 17, 2003, on the request for special relief of Robert C. Stumpf for temporary physical custody of the children pending an order after conciliation. Margaret M. Simok, Esquire Legal Services For Robert C. Stumpf By the Ccr6h sal ..? ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS :Cumberland County, Pennsylvania NO. 03- CIVIL TERM :CUSTODY PRAECIPE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS To the Prothonotary: Kindly allow, Robert C. Stumpf, Plaintiff, to proceed in forma au eris. I, Margaret M. Simok, attorney for the party proceeding in forma au eris, certify that I believe the party is unable to pay the costs and that I am providing free legal services to the party. Margai+t M. Simok Attorney for Plaintiff MidPenn Legal Services 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-9400 r.? -?-, ?_-, .. - ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff V. CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 03-0160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant CUSTODY AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE Z%i? , the undersigned, hereby state that I served a copy of the Order of Court in the above-captioned action upon the Defendant by 1 handing the papers to Ia' '.,A at the following address: ,3 5, S on the /2 r'V' day of U a" uiuy , 2003, at approximately o'clock P.M. I verify that the statements made in this Affidavit are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4909, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Dated: L-c a?3 Q l''* !"'1 ter ?_ Y ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, DEFENDANT 03-0160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this trr day of January, 2003, following a hearing on a petition for special relief, IT IS ORDERED: (1) The temporary order entered on January 10, 2003, is replaced with this temporary order pending an order to be entered following conciliation. (2) Pamela O'Brien shall have temporary physical custody of Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991 and Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994. (3) Pamela O'Brien and Robert Stumpf shall have temporary joint legal custody of Robert and Rachel but the mother shall enroll the children in a school district where she is living. (4) The father shall have the children alternate weekends from 6:00 p.m. Friday through 7:00 p.m. Sunday, the first weekend starting today, January 17, 2003. (5) The father shall have the children from 5:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. each Wednesday evening. i" By the Qourt, C 14 Edgar B:'BayTey, J. r- R /?/ ? 1 `?? F.1 , a k.t ?' _? .?.. r? ?r -y w- `.. ?? ` _ 7 ;:? ` ? J, - . sr 1 _ J_i i.L Joan Carey, Esquire Margaret M. Simok, Esquire Legal Services For Robert C. Stumpf Mark K. Emery, Esquire For Pamela O'Brien 4." sal ROBERT C. SITUMPF, Plaintiff PAMELA O' VS. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Defendant NO. 03- k?a© CIVIL TERM : CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, upon consideration of the attached complaint, it is hereby directed that the parties and their respective counsel appear before the conciliator, at on the _ day of , 2003, at 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 the conference may provide groun s for entry of a temporary or permanent order. The co rt 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 hea int. By the Court, Date: T i Custody Conciliator YOU S OULD 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 OR (800) 990-9108 j AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990 The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County is required by law to comply with the Americans with Disabilities 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 bef re the court. You must attend the scheduled conference or hearing. ROBERT C. SITUMPF, Plaintiff vs. PAMELA O' RIEN, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 03 - CIVIL TERM : CUSTODY COMPLAINT FOR CUSTODY 1. The plaintiff is Robert C. Stumpf, residing at 10 George Circle, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055. 2. They defendant is Pamela O'Brien, whose residence is unknown to plaintiff. To the bes of the Plaintiff's knowledge Defendant is residing in Harrisburg, Dauphin County. 3. The ?laintiff seeks custody of the following children: Name Permanent Residence Age Rachel Stumpf 10 George Circle 8 years Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Robert $tumpf 10 George Circle 11 years Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 i The children were born out of wedlock. The chi,ldren are presently in the custody of the Defendant whose current residence is unknown to thel father. During the children's lifetimes, they have resided with the following persons and at the following addresses: ame Address Date Robert q. Stumpf 10 George Circle Aug. 1999-Dec. 2002* Pamela 'Brien Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 * Defendant was incarcerated for 45 days in January and February of 2002 and the children lived {vith the Plaintiff. The children were removed from the home by the mother in late November of 4001 for approximatel one and one half weeks. Whereabouts when absent remain unknown to th father. Robert C. Stumpf 1130 America Avenue birth -Aug. 1999 Pamela O'Brien W. Babylon, NY 11702 Aitta T ronava The mojther of the children is Pamela O'Brien, whose :residence is currently unkown to Plaintiff. She is single. i The father of the children is Robert C. Stumpf, currently residing at 10 George Circle, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17055. He is single. 4. The ielationship of plaintiff to the children is that of father. The plai6ff currently resides by himself. 5. The r6lationship of defendant to the children is that of mother. The fat er does not know with whom the mother and the children currently reside. To the best of his knowledge they are in Dauphin County and have not established a permanent I residence. The aternal grandmother came to Pennsylvania from New York in December and may still be livi g with the children and the mother. 6. The plaintiff has not participated as a party or witness., or in another capacity, in other litigation conce ing the custody of the children in this or any other court. 7. The Plaintiff has no information of a custody proceeding concerning the children pending in a cou of this Commonwealth. 8. Thy plaintiff does not know of a person not a party to the proceedings who has physical custody of the children or who claims to have custody or visitation rights with respect to the children. 9. The best interest and permanent welfare of the children will be served by granting the relief requeste for reasons including, but not limited to, the following: ). The father has been active in the care and nurturing of the children since i birth, including providing for their physical, educational, emotional and spiritual cell being. ). The mother has not acted in the best interest of the children in ways icluding but not limited to the following: i.) The mother removed the children. from their home of three years on December 22, 2002. The father fears for the safety of the children because the mother refuses to tell him where she has taken the children. Furthermore, the mother has not taken sufficient clothing or school materials for the children. ii). The mother has removed the children from the schools they have attended for the last three years. She has failed to enroll the children in any accredited school since January 6, 2002. iii.) The mother has refused to allow the children to have any physical contact with their father since December 22, 2002. iv) The mother has refused the father any telephone contact with the children since December 22, 2002. v.) The mother refuses to tell the father where the children are living or give him their telephone number. vi.) The mother had removed the children form their regular activities, including but not limited to Girl Scouts and their regularly scheduled religious education. vii.) Mother is currently on parole for a third DUI conviction, and the father fears that the mother could be incarcerated at any time for a violation of her parole since to the best of the father's knowledge the mother continues to drink which is a violation of her parole.. viii.) In spite of several requests by the father himself and through father's counsel, mother has not agreed to any visits of father with the children. jc).The father is the parent best able to facilitate contact with the other parent. i 10. Each parent whose parental rights to the children have not been terminated and the person who ha? physical custody of the children have been named as parties to this action. WHE"FORE, the plaintiff requests this Court to grant primary physical custody of the children to the ?laintiff with partial custody in the defendant. Plaintiff further requests any other relief that is jut and proper. ' Respectfully submitted, Margare . Simok j Attorney for Plaintiff Mid Penn Legal Services 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-9400 VERIFICATION above named Plaintiff, Robert Stumpf, verifies that the statements made in the above {Complaint are true and correct. Plaintiff understands that false herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.. C. S. § 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: IN©3 h;Z Robert Stumpf t U LA- ROBERT C. STU4PF PLAINTIFF V. PAMELA O'BRIE DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF . CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA • 03-160 CIVIL ACTION LAW . IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, it is hereby directed at 4th Floor, Cum for a Pre-Hearing if this cannot be a 17, 2003 , upon consideration of the attached Complaint, parties and their respective counsel appear before Hubert X. Gilroy, Esq. , the conciliator, Carlisle on Thursday, February 06, 2003 at 10:30 AM Conference. At such conference, an effort will be made to resolve the issues in dispute; or to define and narrow the issues to be heard by the court, and to enter into a temporary order. All children ag? five or older may also be present at the conference. Failure to appear at the conference may provide grounds fore try of a temporary or permanent order. The court hereby directs the parties to furnish any and all existing Protection from Abuse orders, Special Relief ordersb and Custody orders to the conciliator 48 hours prior to scheduled hearing. i FOR THE COURT, i i By: /s/ Hubert X. Giln Es a. Custody Conciliator The Co of Common Pleas of Cumberland County is required by law to comply with the Americans with Disabilites wt of 1990. For information about accessible facilities and reasonable accommodations available to disc led individuals having business before the court, please contact our office. All arrangements must be made at east 72 hours prior to any hearing or business before the court. You must attend the scheduled confer nce or hearing. YOU HOULD 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 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, Pennsylvania 1-7013 Telephone (717) 249-3166 ?? ;? f.1tq } f ,, ?', n ?,a- le / I1-?. FEB 2 0 2003 U ROBERT C. STUMPF, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v : CIVIL ACTION - LAW PAMELA O'BRIEN, : NO. 03 -160 CIVIL Defendant : IN CUSTODY COURT ORDER AND NOW, this 70 day of February, 2003, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows: 1. A hearing is scheduled in Courtroom No. 2 of the Cumberland County Courthouse on the c2V day of 2003, at ?? J4 M. at which time testimony will be taken in the above case. At this hearing, the Father, Robert C. Stumpf, 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, each parties position on these issues, a list of witnesses who will be called to testify at the hearing and a summary of the anticipated testimony of each witness. This memorandum shall be filed at least seven (7) days prior to the mentioned hearing date. 2. Pending further order of this court, this court's order of January 17, 2003 shall remain in effect. .", BY CO A Edgar B. Bayley cc: Mark K. Emery, Esquire Margaret M. Simok, Esquire ?-?-Ce ?? ?- ?? J. v + Ste' ;; ;? / 't ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff v PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant Prior Judge: Edgar B. Bayley : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : NO. 03 -160 CIVIL : 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 children who are the subject of this litigation is as follows: Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994; and Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991. 2. A Conciliation Conference was held on February 6, 2003, with the following individuals in attendance: The Mother, Pamela O'Brien, with her counsel, Mark K. Emery, Esquire; and Attorney Margaret M. Simok who appeared on behalf of the Father Robert C. Stumpf. 3. The parties separated in December and this court has already held a short tearing with respect to an emergency petition. After that hearing, primary custody was awarded to Mother subject to the Father having temporary physical custody. Father asserts that he wants primary custody. There is really no room for negotiation and, accordingly, the conciliator was unable to achieve a resolution of the case. 4. The conciliator recommends the entry of an order in the form as attached. i DATE Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquir Custody Conciliator ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2003-160 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION •- LAW IN CUSTODY CUSTODY STIPULATION AND AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT AND STIPULATION entered into on the day, and year hereinafter set forth, by and between Robert C. Stumpf, hereinafter referred to as "Father" and Pamela O'Brien, hereinafter referred to as "Mother". WHEREAS, Mother is an adult individual currently residing at 102 Elmwood Drive, Middletown, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania 17057; and WHEREAS, Father an adult individual currently residing at 10 George Circle, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17055. WHEREAS, the parties are the natural parents of Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991 and Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 2003; and WHEREAS, the parties wish to enter into an agreement relative to custody of the children. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, promises, and agreements as hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows: 1. The Mother and Father shall have shared legal custody of the children. 2 2. Mother shall maintain primary physical custody of the children with periods of partial physical custody belonging to Father such that Father shall enjoy periods of partial physical custody of the,children as follows: a.) alternating weekends, from 5:30 p.m. Friday through 7:00 p.m. Sunday; b.) every Thursday evening from 5:30 p.m. through 8:30 p.m. and every Friday evening when not Father's alternating weekend from 5:30 p.m. through 8:30 p.m. In the event that either parent's schedule changes that prevents these Thursday or Friday evening periods of custody from occurring, Mother and Father will make every effort to arrange for an alternate weekday consistent with both of their schedules. c.) Father shall have the children for the third full calendar weeks of June and July and the second full calendar week of August each year. In turn, Mother shall have the children for the first two full calendar weeks of July each year. In the event that either parent's schedule changes that prevents these weeks from occurring, Mother and Father will arrange for alternate full calendar weeks. Such weeks will begin at 9:30 a.m. on Sunday mornings and conclude the following Saturday at 7:00 p.m. 3. Father shall enjoy custody of the children on F'ather's Day, and Mother shall enjoy custody of the children on Mother's Day from 9:30 a.m. through 7:00 p.m. 4. Mother shall have the children until 2:00 p.m. and Father shall have the children from 2:00 p.m. through 8:00 p.m. on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Easter, Memorial Day, 41h of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve, Christmas Day and New Year's Eve. 3 5. Mother shall have the child until 1:00 p.m. and Father shall have the children from 1:00 p.m. through 7:00 p.m. on the children's birthdays. 6. Both parents shall permit the children to speak with the non-custodial parent each day. 7. Neither party may remove the children from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania except during their period of custody and with notification to the non-custodial parent. 8. The parties shall keep each other advised of any doctor's appointments concerning the chilAKhe parties shall further keep each other advised immediately in the event of serious illness or medical emergency concerning the children, and shall take any necessary steps to ensure that the health and well-being of the children are protected. During such illness or medical emergency, both parties shall have the right to visit the children as often as he or she desires consistent with the proper medical care of the children. 9. The parties shall not do anything that may estrange the children from the other party, or injure the opinion of the child as to the other party, or hamper the free and natural development of the child's love and affection for the other party. Nor shall the parties allow the children to live with other persons who may estrange the children from the other party. 10. Both parents shall maintain an alcohol-free environment for the children when they have custody of the children. 11. Mother shall claim both children as deductions on her Federal Income Tax Returns. 4 12. The parties may make such alternate arrangements regarding the physical custody of the children so long as they may mutually agree. However, if the parties cannot reach a mutual agreement, the terms of this Stipulation and Order shall control. 13. The parties desire that this Stipulation and Agreement be made an Order of the Court of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, and further acknowledge that the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County does, in fact, have jurisdiction over the issue of custody of the parties' minor childfMo has resided in Cumberland County for more than six months and shall retain such jurisdiction should circumstances change and either party desires or requires modification of said Order. 14. The parties acknowledge that they have read and understand the provisions of this Agreement. Each party acknowledges that the Agreement is fair and equitable, and that it is not the result of duress or undue influence. 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto intending to be legally bound by the terms hereof set forth their signatures the day and year herein mentioned. This agreement may be signed in duplicate with all signatures, when combined representing one agreement. ?ab Robert C. Stumpf, Father Date Pamela O'Brien Date Mark K. Emery, Attorney at Law Date 3-J7-Os3 M. Simok, Attorney at Law Date 6 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto intending to be legally bound by the terms hereof set forth their signatures the day and year herein mentioned. This agreement may be signed in duplicate with all signatures, when combined representing one agreement. Robert C. StunipL Father -" 0 Pamela O'Brien Mark K. Emery, Attorney at Law Date Date Date Margaret M. Simok, Attorney at Law Date 6 n t-) Q C: -n rn .?(j i? ...T% ROBERT C.STUMPF, Plaintiff V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 2003-160 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this --Zd?ay of 2003, upon presentation and consideration of the attached Custody Stipulation and Agreement it is hereby ordered and directed that it be entered as an Order of Court. Margaret M. Simok Attorney for Plaintiff Mark K. Emery Attorney for Defendant SF ?o. m_? 4 1 BY THE COURT,. bl?yTb????? ROBERT C.STUMPF, Plaintiff V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 2003-160 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this -2 /h.ck- day of 2003, upon presentation and consideration of the attached Custody Stipulation and Agreement it is hereby ordered and directed that it be entered as an Order of Court. Margaret M. Simok Attorney for Plaintiff Mark K. Emery Attorney for Defendant BY THE COURT, r /)', /3" Edgar B. ayley T. In{ &W r ' ,J, 3,fniAr f7 azy:, y hand M,,? g Carlisle, Ulhonatirv ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff/Petitioner V. PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO.4-0160 CIVIL TERM PETITION FOR CONTEMPT AND MODIFICATION Petitioner, Robert C. Stumpf, by and through his counsel, MidPenn Legal Services, states the following: 1. Plaintiff/Petitioner, hereinafter referred to as Father, resides at 611 Riley Street, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, PA 17102. 2. Defendant/Respondent, hereinafter referred to as Mother, resides at 308 Summit Ridge Drive, Middletown, Dauphin County, PA 17057. 3. The above-named parties are the natural parents of Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991 and Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994. 4. The current Custody Order, attached as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, is dated April 2, 2003. The Order, in pertinent part, grants Mother primary physical custody and Father has periods of partial physical custody on alternating weekends from 5:30 p.m. on Friday through 7:00 p.m. on Sunday. Father also has periods of custody every Thursday from 5:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. and every Friday evening when not Father's alternating weekend from 5:30 to 8:30 p.m. The parties also share legal custody of the children. 5. Mother has willfully disobeyed the Order in ways including, but not limited to, the following: a. Refusing to permit Father to exercise his periods of partial physical custody in accordance with the Order. Father has not seen Robert or Rachel in the last year despite repeated attempts to exercise his periods of partial physical custody. b. Refusing to notify Father of important matters in the children's lives, such as changing school districts, involvement in athletic activities or medical issues. c. Scheduling the children's extra-curricular activities or appointments during Father's visitation periods, so that Father cannot exercise his periods of partial physical custody. d. Refusing to communicate with Father about the custody schedule. Mother forces Father to discuss custody issues with her boyfriend, who is verbally aggressive toward Father and is unwilling to communicate rationally or reasonably with Father. e. Refusing Father adequate telephone communications with the children. 6. Mother is not acting in the children's best interest for reasons including, but not limited to, the following: a. Mother has willfully denied Father partial physical custody of Robert and Rachel in ways set forth in paragraph five of this Petition for Contempt and Modification. b. Mother's continual alienation of Father interferes with the appropriate and healthy father/son and father/daughter relationship that is imperative to Robert's and Rachel's ongoing emotional development and well being. c. If Father attends any of the children's extracurricular activities, Mother immediately leaves the activity and takes the children with her. d. Mother has told the school principal that Father is not allowed by the court to see the children, and Father has been prohibited by the school from attending the children's extra-curricular activities. e. Mother has repeatedly moved the children between various schools in Cumberland and Dauphin County in an attempt to prevent Father from learning of the children's whereabouts and to preclude Father from exercising his rights to shared legal custody of the children. f. Mother and her boyfriend repeatedly harass Father when he calls to speak to the children and refuse to allow the children to have personal or private conversations with Father. g. Mother and her boyfriend refuse to allow Father to have any written communication with the children. Mother's boyfriend advised Father that letters addressed to the children at their residence have been thrown away. Letters that Father sent to the children via Mother at her work address have been refused and returned. h. Because Father does not have his own phone and must borrow a telephone from his friends, these numbers appear on Mother's Caller-ID. Mother and her boyfriend then call those numbers and harass the people who allow Father to use their phone to call the children. i. Mother and her boyfriend have called and harassed the pastor of Father's rehabilitation program by leaving degrading messages about Father. j. Mother's actions have interfered with Father's ability to exercise his shared legal custody rights by participating in major decisions regarding the children. 7. Father is entitled to modified periods of partial custody, which would be in the best interest of the children, for reasons including but not limited to the following: a. Father is currently enrolled in a rehabilitation program with the Bethesda Mission and is unable to adhere to the April 2003 custody schedule which provided for overnight visits with the children. b. Father wants to maintain the relationships that he has established with Robert and Rachel. It is imperative that the children have contact and visitation with Father for their emotional well being and development. c. Father is able to continue with his periods of partial custody on Sundays during the day. This ongoing time with the children will reinforce Father's dedication to his children and will allow then to nurture their ongoing relationship with Father. 8. Mother was represented in the prior action by Attorney Mark Emery. Father's counsel contacted Attorney Emery who indicated that he no longer represents Mother. WHEREFORE, Father respectfully requests the following: a. That this Court find Mother in contempt of the existing April 2, 2003, Court Order. b. That this matter be scheduled for a custody conciliation to establish terms of a modified custody schedule. c. Mother and Father shall continue to share legal custody of the children. d. That Mother immediately allow Father to exercise his periods of partial physical custody every week on Sunday from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. e. That Father be granted reasonable contact via telephone or written correspondence with the children when they are in Mother's custody. f. Any other relief this Court finds just and proper. VaDiaamonnddstonep bmitted. Jess Esquire Grace D'Alo, Esquire Attorney for Defendant/Petitioner MidPenn Legal Services 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-9400 ROBERT C.STUMPF, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. : NO. 2003-160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN, : CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendant : IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 1:n?( day of 6) .,.J , 2003, upon presentation and consideration of the attached Custody Stipulation and Agreement it is hereby ordered and directed that it be entered as an Order of Court. BY THE COURT, E d a r B[ B J. ' Margaret M. Simok Attorney for Plaintiff Mark K. Emery Attorney for Defendant ROBERT C. STUMPF, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. : NO. 2003-160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN, : CIVIL ACTION - LAW r Defendant : IN CUSTODY _ F - CUSTODY v, J CUSTODY STIPULATION AND AGREEMENT ? :_a -L. THIS AGREEMENT AND STIPULATION entered into on the day and year hereinafter set forth, by and between Robert C. Stumpf, hereinafter referred to as "Father" and Pamela O'Brien, hereinafter referred to as "Mother". WHEREAS, Mother is an adult individual currently residing at 102 Elmwood Drive, Middletown, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania 17057; and WHEREAS, Father an adult individual currently residing at 10 George Circle, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17055. WHEREAS, the parties are the natural parents of Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991 and Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 2003; and WHEREAS, the parties wish to enter into an agreement relative to custody of the children. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, promises, and agreements as hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows: 1. The Mother and Father shall have shared legal custody of the children. 2 2. Mother shall maintain primary physical custody of the children with periods of partial physical custody belonging to Father such that Father shall enjoy periods of partial physical custody of the children as follows: a.) alternating weekends, from 5:30 p.m. Friday through 7:00 p.m. Sunday; b.) every Thursday evening from 5:30 p.m. through 8:30 p.m. and every Friday evening when not Father's alternating weekend from 5:30 p.m. through 8:30 p.m. In the event that either parent's schedule changes that prevents these Thursday or Friday evening periods of custody from occurring, Mother and Father will make every effort to arrange for an alternate weekday consistent with both of their schedules. c.) Father shall have the children for the third full calendar weeks of June and July and the second fiill calendar week of August each year. In turn, Mother shall have the children for the first two full calendar weeks of July each year. In the event that either parent's schedule changes that prevents these weeks from occurring, Mother and Father will arrange for alternate full calendar weeks. Such weeks will begin at 9:30 a.m. on Sunday mornings and conclude the following Saturday at 7:00 p.m. 3. Father shall enjoy custody of the children on Father's Day, and Mother shall enjoy custody of the children on Mother's Day from 9:30 a.m. through 7:00 p.m. 4. Mother shall have the children until 2:00 p.m. and Father shall have the children from 2:00 p.m. through 8:00 p.m. on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Easter, Memorial Day, 4``' of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve, Christmas Day and New Year's Eve. 3 5. Mother shall have the child until 1:00 p.m. and Father shall have the children from 1:00 p.m. through 7:00 p.m. on the children's birthdays. 6. Both parents shall permit the children to speak with the non-custodial parent each day. 7. Neither party may remove the children from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania except during their period of custody and with notification to the non-custodial parent. 8. The parties shall keep each other advised of any doctor's appointments concerning the child. The parties shall further keep each other advised immediately in the event of serious illness or medical emergency concerning the children, and shall take any necessary steps to ensure that the health and well-being of the children are protected. During such illness or medical emergency, both parties shall have the right to visit the children as often as he or she desires consistent with the proper medical care of the children. 9. The parties shall not do anything that may estrange the children from the other party, or injure the opinion of the child as to the other party, or hamper the free and natural development of the child's love and affection for the other party. Nor shall the parties allow the children to live with other persons who may estrange the children from the other party. 10. Both parents shall maintain an alcohol-free environment for the children when they have custody of the children. 11. Mother shall claim both children as deductions on her Federal Income Tax Returns. 4 12. The parties may make such alternate arrangements regarding the physical custody of the children so long as they may mutually agree. However, if the parties cannot reach a mutual agreement, the terms of this Stipulation and Order shall control. 13. The parties desire that this Stipulation and Agreement be made an Order of the Court of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, and further acknowledge that the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County does, in fact, have jurisdiction over the issue of custody of the parties' minor child who has resided in Cumberland County for more than six months and shall retain such jurisdiction should circumstances change and either party desires or requires modification of said Order. 14. The parties acknowledge that they have read and understand the provisions of this Agreement. Each party acknowledges that the Agreement is fair and equitable, and that it is not the result of duress or undue influence. 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto intending to be legally bound by the terms hereof set forth their signatures the day and year herein mentioned. This agreement may be signed in duplicate with all signatures, when combined representing one agreement. 41 .1 /'53 1;6'elc . C Vav Robert C. Stumpf, Father Date Pamela O'Brien Date Mark K. Emery, Attorney at Law Date t7 A.1 -j-7 -03 Margaret M. Simok, Attorney at Law Date 6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto intending to be legally bound by the terms hereof set forth their signatures the day and year herein mentioned. This agreement may be signed in duplicate with all signatures, when combined representing one agreement. Robert C. Stumpf Father Date ?k snc ?. ?-- ? ? e•k 3/,P ro O v Pamela O'Brien Date Mark K. Emery, Attorney at Law Date Margaret M. Simok, Attorney at Law Date 6 VERIFICATION The above-named Plaintiff, Robert C. Stumpf, verifies that the statements made in the above Petition for Contempt and modification are true and correct. Plaintiff understands that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: I? ? Ofd Robert C. Stumpf ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff/Petitioner CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. : NO. 89-0160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jessica Diamondstone, Esquire, of MidPenn Legal Services, attorney for the Plaintiff, Robert C. Stumpf, hereby certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing Petition for Contempt and Modification on the following date and in the manner indicated below: U.S. First Class Certified Mail, Return Receipt, Restricted Delivery Pamela O'Brien 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 Date: 3 /IOU/Mk" c?U)-( MidPenn L 1 Services, Inc. Jess' a Diamondstone, Esquire 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 243-9400 1 'CJ f t'1 CA) s ? ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff/Petitioner V. PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA D3 NO.-8'? 0160 CIVIL TERM C. r.^a ' _ 71 r r j 7- -T1 - -T, PRAECIPE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 1 To the Prothonotary: to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff Robert C. Stumpf Kindly allow , , , I, Jessica Diamondstone, attorney for the party proceeding in forma pauperis, certify that I believe the party is unable to pay the costs and that I am providing free legal services to the party. Jessica amondstone, Esquire Grace D'Alo, Esquire MidPenn Legal Services 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-9400 ROBERT C. STUMPF IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. PAMELA O'BRIEN DEFENDANT 03-160 CIVIL ACTION LAW IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, Tuesday, November 16, 2004 , 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, December 16, 2004 at 10:30 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. All children age five or older may also be present at the conference. 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: Ise HuhcrtX Gilroy 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 I C - #! 10 ' Z RO WOZ t, AC: ',0H- 0e3 uNl 30 301-1-#C?~ T U NOV 0 4 2004 C ?l ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff/Petitioner CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. -89-0160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this day of , 2004, upon consideration of the Petition for Contempt and Modification, the following Order is entered: 1. Defendant is in contempt of the April 2, 2003, Custody Order. 2. This matter is scheduled for conciliation before on , 2004, at _.m. 3. Plaintiff and Defendant shall communicate to immediately begin Plaintiff's periods of partial custody every Sunday from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. 4. Plaintiff shall have reasonable telephone and email contact and written correspondence with the children when they are in Defendant's custody. 5. Plaintiff and Defendant shall have shared legal custody and Father shall have access to all of the children's medical and educational records. 6. Father shall be permitted to attend the children's extra-curricular activities. 7. Neither party shall remove the children from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania except during their period of custody and with notification to the non-custodial parent. By the Court, J. Distribution: Jessica Diamondstone, Esquire MidPenn Legal Services 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, PA 17013 Mark Emery 410 North 2nd Street Harrisburg PA 17011 ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff/Petitioner V. PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NOV-0160 CIVIL TERM PETITION FOR CONTEMPT AND MODIFICATION Petitioner, Robert C. Stumpf, by and through his counsel, MidPenn Legal Services, states the following: 1. Plaintiff/Petitioner, hereinafter referred to as Father, resides at 611 Riley Street, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, PA 17102. 2. Defendant/Respondent, hereinafter referred to as Mother, resides at 308 Summit Ridge Drive, Middletown, Dauphin County, PA 17057. 3. The above-named parties are the natural parents of Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991 and Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994. 4. The current Custody Order, attached as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, is dated April 2, 2003. The Order, in pertinent part, grants Mother primary physical custody and Father has periods of partial physical custody on alternating weekends from 5:30 p.m. on Friday through 7:00 p.m. on Sunday. Father also has periods of custody every Thursday from 5:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. and every Friday evening when not Father's alternating weekend from 5:30 to 8:30 p.m. The parties also share legal custody of the children. 5. Mother has willfully disobeyed the Order in ways including, but not limited to, the following: a. Refusing to permit Father to exercise his periods of partial physical custody in accordance with the Order. Father has not seen Robert or Rachel in the last year despite repeated attempts to exercise his periods of partial physical custody. b. Refusing to notify Father of important matters in the children's lives, such as changing school districts, involvement in athletic activities or medical issues. c. Scheduling the children's extra-curricular activities or appointments during Father's visitation periods, so that Father camiot exercise his periods of partial physical custody. d. Refusing to communicate with Father about the custody schedule. Mother forces Father to discuss custody issues with her boyfriend, who is verbally aggressive toward Father and is unwilling to communicate rationally or reasonably with Father. e. Refusing Father adequate telephone communications with the children. 6. Mother is not acting in the children's best interest for reasons including, but not limited to, the following: a. Mother has willfully denied Father partial physical custody of Robert and Rachel in ways set forth in paragraph five of this Petition for Contempt and Modification. b. Mother's continual alienation of Father interferes with the appropriate and healthy father/son and father/daughter relationship that is imperative to Robert's and Rachel's ongoing emotional development and well being. c. If Father attends any of the children's extracurricular activities, Mother immediately leaves the activity and takes the children with her. d. Mother has told the school principal that Father is not allowed by the court to see the children, and Father has been prohibited by the school from attending the children's extra-curricular activities. e. Mother has repeatedly moved the children between various schools in Cumberland and Dauphin County in an attempt to prevent Father from learning of the children's whereabouts and to preclude Father from exercising his rights to shared legal custody of the children. f. Mother and her boyfriend repeatedly harass Father when he calls to speak to the children and refuse to allow the children to have personal or private conversations with Father. g. Mother and her boyfriend refuse to allow Father to have any written communication with the children. Mother's boyfriend advised Father that letters addressed to the children at their residence have been thrown away. Letters that Father sent to the children via Mother at her work address have been refused and returned. h. Because Father does not have his own phone and must borrow a telephone from his friends, these numbers appear on Mother's Caller-ID. Mother and her boyfriend then call those numbers and harass the people who allow Father to use their phone to call the children. i. Mother and her boyfriend have called and harassed the pastor of Father's rehabilitation program by leaving degrading messages about Father. j. Mother's actions have interfered with Father's ability to exercise his shared legal custody rights by participating in major decisions regarding the children. 7. Father is entitled to modified periods of partial custody, which would be in the best interest of the children, for reasons including but not limited to the following: a. Father is currently enrolled in a rehabilitation program with the Bethesda Mission and is unable to adhere to the April 21.003 custody schedule which provided for overnight visits with the children. b. Father wants to maintain the relationships that he has established with Robert and Rachel. It is imperative that the children have contact and visitation with Father for their emotional well being and development. c. Father is able to continue with his periods of partial custody on Sundays during the day. This ongoing time with the children will reinforce Father's dedication to his children and will allow then to nurture their ongoing relationship with Father. 8. Mother was represented in the prior action by Attorney Mark Emery. Father's counsel contacted Attorney Emery who indicated that he no longer represents Mother. WHEREFORE, Father respectfully requests the following: a. That this Court find Mother in contempt of the existing April 2, 2003, Court Order. b. That this matter be scheduled for a custody conciliation to establish terms of a modified custody schedule. c. Mother and Father shall continue to share legal custody of the children. d. That Mother immediately allow Father to exercise his periods of partial physical custody every week on Sunday from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. e. That Father be granted reasonable contact via telephone or written correspondence with the children when they are in Mother's custody. f. Any other relief this Court finds just and proper. Respectfully s bmitted. Jess a Diamondstone, Esquire Grace D'Alo, Esquire Attorney for Defendant/Petitioner MidPenn Legal Services 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-9400 ROBERT C.STUMPF, Plaintiff V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2003-160 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 1 n?( day of 2003, upon presentation and consideration of the attached Custody Stipulation and Agreement it is hereby ordered and directed that it be entered as an Order of Court. Margaret M. Simok Attorney for Plaintiff Marl: K. Emery Attorney for Defendant BY THE COURT, Ed Jar B. B y? ley J. ' ROBERT C. STUMPF, : IN THE COURT' OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. : NO. 2003-160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN, : CIVIL ACTION - LAW r> =4 Defendant : IN CUSTODY ?.-• C--`C.7 - 'art CUSTODY STIPULATION AND AGREEMENT e ' ' `={ THIS AGREEMENT AND STIPULATION entered into on the day and year hereinafter set forth, by and between Robert C. Stumpf, hereinafter referred to as "Father" and Pamela O'Brien, hereinafter referred to as "Mother". WHEREAS, Mother is an adult individual currently residing at 102 Elmwood Drive, Middletown, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania 17057; and WHEREAS, Father an adult individual currently residing at 10 George Circle, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17055. WHEREAS, the parties are the natural parents of Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991 and Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 2003; and WHEREAS, the parties wish to enter into an agreement relative to custody of the children. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, promises, and agreements as hereinafter set forth, the parties agree as follows: 1. The Mother and Father shall have shared legal custody of the children. 2 2. Mother shall maintain primary physical custody of the children with periods of partial physical custody belonging to Father such that Father shall enjoy periods of partial physical custody of the children as follows: a.) alternating weekends, from 5:30 p.m. Friday through 7:00 p.m. Sunday; b.) every Thursday evening from 5:30 p.m. through 8:30 p.m. and every Friday evening when not Father's alternating weekend from 5:30 p.m. through 8:30 p.m. In the event that either parent's schedule changes that prevents these Thursday or Friday evening periods of custody from occurring, Mother and Father will make every effort to arrange for an alternate weekday consistent with both of their schedules. c.) Father shall have the children for the third frill calendar weeks of June and July and the second fiill calendar week of August each year. In turn, Mother shall have the children for the first two full calendar weeks of July each year. In the event that either parent's schedule changes that prevents these weeks from occurring, Mother and Father will arrange for alternate full calendar weeks. Such weeks will begin at 9:30 a.m. on Sunday mornings and conclude the following Saturday at 7:00 p.m. 3. Father shall enjoy custody of the children on Father's Day, and Mother shall enjoy custody of the children on Mother's Day from 9:30 a.m. through 7:00 p.m. 4. Mother shall have the children until 2:00 p.m. and Father shall have the children from 2:00 p.m. through 8:00 p.m. on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Easter, Memorial Day, 4`h of.luly, Labor Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve, Christmas Day and New Year's Eve. 3 5. Mother shall have the child until 1:00 p.m. and Father shall have the children from 1:00 p.m. through 7:00 p.m. on the children's birthdays. 6. Both parents shall permit the children to speak with the non-custodial parent each day. 7. Neither party may remove the children from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania except during their period of custody and with notification to the non-custodial parent. 8. The parties shall keep each other advised of any doctor's appointments concerning the child. The parties shall further keep each other advised immediately in the event of serious illness or medical emergency concerning the children, and shall take any necessary steps to ensure that the health and well-being of the children axe protected. During such illness or medical emergency, both parties shall have the right to visit the children as often as he or she desires consistent with the proper medical care of the children. 9. The parties shall not do anything that may estrange the children from the other party, or injure the opinion of the child as to the other party, or hamper the free and natural development of the child's love and affection for the other party. Nor shall the parties allow the children to live with other persons who may estrange the children from the other party. 10. Both parents shall maintain an alcohol-free environment for the children when they have custody of the children. 11. Mother shall claim both children as deductions on her Federal Income Tax Returns. 4 { 12. The parties may make such alternate arrangenients regarding the physical custody of the children so long as they may mutually agree. However, if the parties cannot reach a mutual agreement, the terms of this Stipulation and Order shall control. 13. The parties desire that this Stipulation and Agreement be made an Order of the Court of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, and further acknowledge that the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County does, in fact, have jurisdiction over the issue of custody of the parties' minor child who has resided in Cumberland County for more than six months and shall retain such jurisdiction should circumstances change and either party desires or requires modification of said Order. 14. The parties acknowledge that they have read and understand the provisions of this Agreement. Each party acknowledges that the Agreement is fair and equitable, and that it is not the result of duress or undue influence. 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto intending to be legally bound by the terms hereof set forth their signatures the day and year herein mentioned. This agreement may be signed in duplicate with all signatures, when combined representing one agreement. Robert C. Stumpf, Father 3 /a-!z' Date Pamela O'Brien Date Mark K. Emery, Attorney at Law Margaret N/1. Simok, Attorney at Law Date 3-J7-03 - Date 6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto intending to be legally bound by the terms hereof set forth their signatures the day and year herein mentioned. This agreement may be signed in duplicate with all signatures, when combined representing one agreement. Robert C. Stun1p-£ Father{ Date Pamela O'Brien Mark K. Emery, Attorney at Law Date Date Margaret M. Simok, Attorney at Law Date 6 VERIFICATION The above-named Plaintiff, Robert C. Stumpf, verifies that the statements made in the above Petition for contempt and modification are true and correct. Plaintiff understands that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ?2vfz&j Date: / 1X Robert C. Stumpf ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff/Petitioner CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 89-0160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jessica Diamondstone, Esquire, of MidPenn Legal Services, attorney for the Plaintiff, Robert C. Stumpf, hereby certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing Petition for Contempt and Modification on the following date and in the manner indicated below: U.S. First Class Certified Mail, Return Receipt, Restricted Delivery Pamela O'Brien 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 MidPenn L?? 1'. Services, Inc. /I//7 Date: 3 /JOUlm?xi Zu?? Jessita Diamondstone, Esquire 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 243-9400 ? "Ci S T'7 . C13 . 1 ? ? 1 ? DEC 21 2004 ROBERT C. STUMPF, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v : CIVIL ACTION - LAW PAMELA O'BRIEN, : NO. 03-160 Defendant : IN CUSTODY COURT ORDER AND NOW, this day of December, 2004, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation report, it is ordered and directed as follows: 1. A hearing is scheduled in Court Room No. 2 in the Cumberland County Court House on L* A the r day of 2005 at LiO4 in. At this hearing, the father shall be the moving party and hall p ceed initially with testimony. At issue at this hearing shall be father's petition for contempt and shall also be father's request for the permanent modification of the existing Custody Order. Counsel for the parties, or the parties themselves if they do not have legal counsel, shall file with the Court and opposing counsel a memorandum setting forth the history of custody in this case, each parties position on the custody issues, a list of witnesses who will be called to testify on behalf of each party and a summary of anticipated testimony of each witness. This memorandum shall be filed at least five (5) days prior to the mentioned hearing date. 2. Pending further Order of this Court, this Courts April 2, 2003 Order is modified on a temporary basis as follows: a. The father shall enjoy periods of temporary custody with the minor children on December 26th from noon until 5 p.m., on January 2"d from noon until 5 p.m., and on each Saturday thereafter from noon until 5 p.m. Father shall handle all transportation for exchange of custody and shall pick up the children at noon at mother's home and V shall deliver the children back to the mother at 5 p.m. 3. Father shall also enjoy reasonable telephone contact with the minor children when the children are in the mother's custody. BY THE COUR Judge Edgar R Bailey; cS?Jfisica Diamondstone, Esquire ?'amela O'Brien 9, 28 a °/ ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff v PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : NO. 03-160 : 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 children/child who are the subject of this litigation is as follows: Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991 and Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994. 2. A Conciliation Conference was held on December 20, 2004, with the following individuals in attendance: The father, Ropbert C. Stumpf, with his attorney, Jessica Diamondstone, and the mother, Pamela O'Brien, who appeared without an attorney. 3. There was a prior Order in this case entered in April 2003, which was done pursuant to a stipulation whereby the parties agreed they would share legal custody, mother would enjoy primary physical custody and father had periods of temporary custody on alternating weekends, some evenings, summers and holidays. 4. Father's situation has currently changed. He has experienced alcohol problems and he is currently a resident at the Bethesda Mission in :Harrisburg. He still wants to see the children, but he cannot accommodate the children on alternating weekends or otherwise. Mother is taking the position that she will not give the children to the father because she feels the father is not an appropriate role model and for other reasons, most notably the fact that he is living at a mission rather than a standard residential situation. Father's petition is for contempt because mother had been refusing to deliver the children, and father is also seeking a modification whereby he merely gets a couple hours on a weekend to accommodate his current living arrangement. 5. Based upon the information that the Conciliator received at the Conciliation Conference and in light of the fact there was a previously existing order giving the father liberal periods of temporary custody with the minor children, the Conciliator recommends the existing order be modified with the case scheduled for a hearing so that both parties can present their positions to the Court. The Conciliator recommends an order in the form as attached. DATE (??V Hubert X. oy, Esquire Custody nciliator JAN 1 4 ?005' G ROBERT C. STUMPF, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff V. CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO, 03-160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant :CUSTODY ORDER FOR CONTINUANCE AND NOW, this A? day of January, 2005, upon consideration of the attached Motion for Continuance, the matter scheduled for hearing on January 27, 2005, at 1:30 p.m. is hereby rescheduled for hearing on.? FY??, 2005 aQ A G.m. in Courtroom No. 2 on the 4"' Floor of the Cumberland County Courthouse, 1 Courthouse Square, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. By the Edgar B. Bayley, Jessica Diamondstone, Esquire MidPenn Legal Services 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, PA 17013 Pamela O'Brien, Pro Se Defendant 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 I-lei-6s' ri ? ?_, ?, ., .:3 t, . ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 03-160 CIVIL TERM CUSTODY MOTION FOR CONTIlJUANCE Plaintiff, Robert C. Stumpf, by and through his attorneys, MidPenn Legal Services, moves the Court for an Order rescheduling the hearing in the above-captioned case on the grounds that: 1. This matter was scheduled for a hearing on January 27, 2005 at 1:30 p.m. 2. Plaintiff has advised counsel that an important and necessary witness will be out of the country until early February 2005, and is unable to attend the hearing on January 27, 2005. 3. Counsel for Plaintiff requests that this matter be continued until after February 2005, to ensure that this witness will be available to testify. 4. Defendant is unrepresented in this matter. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that the Court grant this Motion and reschedule the hearing in this matter. Respectfully Submitted, Jessica Diamondstone, Esquire MidPenn Legal Services 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-9400 ROBERT C. STUMPF, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 03-160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant :CUSTODY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jessica Diamondstone, Esquire, of MidPenn Legal Services, attorney for the Plaintiff, Robert C. Stumpf, hereby certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing Motion for Continuance on the following date and in the manner indicated below: U.S. First Class Mail. Postage Pre-Paid Pamela O'Brien, Pro Se Defendant 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 MidPenn Legal Services, Inc. Date: -/ ssic 2a mo Mi gal Services 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, PA 17013 (" t c' ??.? ?' i '':5 _I L' i; ., ?? ur , ROBERT C. STUMPF, PLAINTIFF V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 03-160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this day of March, 2005, the following order is entered: (1) The custody orders of April 2, 2003 and December 28, 2004, are vacated and replaced with this order. (2) Robert C. Stumpf and Pamela O'Brien shall have joint legal custody of their children, Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991, and Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994. (3) The mother shall have primary physical custody of Robert and Rachel. (4) The father shall have temporary physical custody of Robert and Rachel each Saturday from noon until 5:00 p.m. He shall pick up the children at the mother's home and return them each Saturday. (5) The father shall arrange for counseling with Robert through Catholic Charities and the mother shall ensure that Robert attends scheduled counseling sessions. (6) The father shall have reasonable telephone contact with the children when they are with the mother. ti By the.(366rt, Edgar B. Bayley, J. Z ica Diamondstone, Esquire For PI tiff amela O'Brien, Pro se 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 :sal v w• Ca ? f ta.?.-. ?.; ?} ?... L ?: ? I 4.' f.;_ I l.f f.- ? r" ? ? . L,? , _ _.. Cl X25 r?s CJ 0 ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff/Petitioner v. PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 03-1(0O NO. & CIVIL TERM PRAECIPE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS To the Prothonotary: Kindly allow, Robert C. Stumpf, Plaintiff, to proceed in forma au eris. I, Jessica Diamondstone, attorney for the party proceeding in forma ap uUeris, certify that I believe the party is unable to pay the costs and that I am providing free legal services to the party. Jessica ?amondstone, Esquire Grace D'Alo, ]Esquire MidPenn Legal Services 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-9400 y. ? '?' ? t_.._ C? ?-?' - C'? 1 rrC- J1. (^i E u_ 4? ?-, _ , Cl ° CJ a?+ ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF' COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff/Petitioner CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. : NO. 03-160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this day of 2005, upon consideration of the Petition for Contempt and Modification, the following Order is entered: 1. Defendant is in contempt of the March 3, 2005, Custody Order. 2. This matter is scheduled for conciliation before 2005, at .m. 3. Mother and Father continue to share legal custody of the children. on 4. Father shall have periods of partial physical custody according to the following schedule: 1.) Every Saturday from 12 p.m. to 5 p.m. 2.) Every Wednesday evening from 6 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. 3.) Alternating Sundays from 10:00 a.m. to 5 p.m. 5. Father shall have reasonable contact via telephone and written correspondence with the children when they are in Mother's custody, without interference or involvement of Boyfriend. 6. Mother shall ensure Robert's attendance at counseling sessions, when scheduled by Father in accordance with the March 3, 2005 order. 7. Boyfriend is ordered to refrain from any interference or involvement with custody exchanges or telephone conversations between Father and the children. 8. Mother shall provide Father with all information relevant to legal custody to which he is entitled such as school information, doctor's visits, etc., in a timely manner. By the Court, J. Distribution: Jessica Diamondstone, Esquire MidPenn Legal Services 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, PA 17013 Pamela O'Brien, pro se Defendant 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown PA 17057 ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff/Petitioner V. PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 03-160 CIVIL TERM IN CUSTODY PETITION FOR CONTEMPT AND MODIFICATION Petitioner, Robert C. Stumpf, by and through his counsel, MidPenn Legal Services, states the following: 1. Plaintiff/Petitioner, hereinafter referred to as Father, resides at 611 Riley Street, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, PA 17102. 2. Defendant/Respondent, hereinafter referred to as Mother, resides at 308 Summit Ridge Drive, Middletown, Dauphin County, PA 17057. 3. The above-named parties are the natural parents of Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991 and Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994. 4. The current Custody Order, attached as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, is dated March 3, 2005. The Order, in pertinent part, grants the parties shared legal custody of the children. Mother has primary physical custody with Father having periods of temporary physical custody every Saturday from noon until 5:00 p.m., and reasonable telephone contact with the children when they are with Mother. The Order also requires Mother to ensure that Robert Stumpf attend scheduled counseling sessions with Father. 5. Mother has willfully disobeyed the Order in ways including, but not limited to, the following: a. Refusing to permit Father to exercise his periods of temporary physical custody in accordance with the Order. Father's visits have only extended to Rachel. b. Failing to take Robert to a scheduled counseling session. Since Robert failed to attend the session, Father has been put on a waiting list until at least September for a new appointment.. c. Refusing to communicate with Father about the custody schedule. Mother continues to force Father to discuss custody issues with her boyfriend, Jeff Miller, who is verbally aggressive toward Father and is incapable of communicating rationally or reasonably with Father. d. Refusing Father adequate telephone communications with Robert and Rachel by not answering the telephone or not allowing the children to return calls to Father. When Father is able to get through by telephone, Mother's boyfriend is audible in the background making derogatory comments about Father to Rachel. e. Preventing mail from Father from reaching Robert and Rachel. f. Mother's boyfriend interferes with Father's relationship with Robert and Rachel by speaking negatively about Father to Robert and Rachel and encouraging disrespectful behavior by the children towards Father. g. Mother's boyfriend harasses and threatens Father when Father attempts to pick up Robert and Rachel at Mother's residence, sometimes resulting in Father leaving without the children. 6. Mother is not acting in the children's best interest for reasons including, but not limited to, the following: a. Mother and Boyfriend have willfully denied Father partial physical custody of Robert and Rachel in ways set. forth in Paragraph Five of this Petition for Contempt and Modification. b. This is the second time in nine months that Father has been forced to pursue a contempt action against Mother. Creating such a tense and negative atmosphere regarding custody causes stress for the children and does not serve their best interests. c. Mother and Boyfriend continually alienate Father which interferes with the appropriate and healthy father/son and father/daughter relationships that are imperative to Robert's and Rachel's ongoing emotional development and well being. d. Mother and Boyfriend refuse to allow Father to have written communication with the children. Boyfriend told Father that letters addressed to the children at their residence get thrown away before the children get them. Letters that Father sent to the children via Mother at her work address were refused and returned. e. Mother's actions interfere with Father's ability to exercise his shared legal custody right to participate in major decisions regarding the children. f Mother continues to allow Boyfriend to denigrate Father to the children and encourages Boyfriend's confrontational attitude towards Father when he arrives for custody exchanges. This behavior is intimidating to the children and interferes with their healthy development of a relationship with Father. 7. Father is entitled to modified periods of partial custody, which is in the best interest of the children, for reasons including but not limited to the following: a. Father wants to maintain the relationships that he has established with Rachel and Robert and still wishes to pursue counseling with Robert to help them better understand each other and the situations they are facing. It is imperative that the children have regular and ongoing contact with Father for their emotional well being and development. b. In August, 2005, Father will graduate from his year-long rehabilitation program with the Bethesda Mission. As part of that program, he has received counseling and support to ensure; his ongoing sobriety and to help him better understand and interact with his children. c. Father is able to exercise his periods of partial custody as set forth in the March 3, 2005 order and wishes to have additional time as his schedule permits. The failure to exercise periods of partial custody is the result of Mother's and Boyfriend's interference, not Father's lack of interest or determination to see the children. d. Father still wishes to attend counseling with Robert. He has maintained contact with various available counseling services to ensure that he can schedule an appointment if Mother is ordered to comply with the current custody arrangement that provides for the joint counseling sessions. e. Father seeks a custody schedule to address holidays. 8. It is unknown whether Defendant is represented and counsel for Plaintiff is unable to request concurrence for the relief requested in this Petition. WHEREFORE, Father respectfully requests the following: a. That this Court find Mother in contempt of the existing March 3, 2005, Court Order. b. That this matter be scheduled for a custody conciliation to establish terms of a modified custody schedule. c. That Mother and Father continue to share legal custody of the children. d. That Father's periods of partial custody be increased as follows: 1.) Every Saturday from 12 p.m. to 5 p.m. 2.) Every Wednesday evening from 6 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. 3.) Alternating Sundays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. e. That Father be granted reasonable contact via telephone and written correspondence with the children when they are in Mother's custody, without interference or involvement of Boyfriend. f. That Mother ensure Robert's attendance at counseling sessions, in accordance with the March 3, 2005 order. g. That Boyfriend be ordered to refrain from any interference or involvement with custody exchanges or telephone conversations between Father and the children. h. That Mother provide Father with all information relevant to legal custody to which he is entitled such as school information, doctor's visits, etc., in a timely manner. i. Any other relief this Court finds just and proper. Respectfully su itted, Jessi a Diamondstone, Esquire Grace D'Alo, Esquire Attorney for Defendant/Petitioner MidPenn Legal Services 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-9400 VERIFICATION The above-named Plaintiff, Robert c. Stumpf, verifies that the statements made in the above Petition for contempt and modification are true and correct. Plaintiff understands that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: 04D 0 Robert C. Stumpf ROBERT C. STUMPF, PLAINTIFF V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 03-160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this day of March, 2005, the following order is entered: (1) The custody orders of April 2, 2003 and December 28, 2004, are vacated and replaced with this order. (2) Robert C. Stumpf and Pamela O'Brien shall have joint legal custody of their children, Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991, and Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994. (3) The mother shall have primary physical custody of Robert and Rachel. (4) The father shall have temporary physical custody of Robert and Rachel each Saturday from noon until 5:00 p.m. He shall pick up the children at the mother's home and return them each Saturday. (5) The father shall arrange for counseling with Robert through Catholic Charities and the mother shall ensure that Robert attends scheduled counseling sessions. (6) The father shall have reasonable telephone contact with the children when they are with the mother. Jessica Diamondstone, Esquire For Plaintiff Pamela O'Brien, Pro se 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown. PA 17057 :sal Edgar, B. Be ney, j. fry iio'?. 9 ? F. ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff/Petitioner V. PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent IN THE COURT OF' COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. CIVIL TERM CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jessica Diamondstone, Esquire, of MidPenn Legal Services, attorney for Plaintiff, Robert C. Stumpf, hereby certify that I have served a copy of the forgoing Petition for Contempt and Modification on the following date and in the manner indicated below: U.S. First Class Certified Mail, Return Receipt, Restricted Delivery Pamela O'Brien 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 Date: d-a•o?i- Jessica D' ondstone, Esquire Counsel for Plaintiff MidPenn Legal Services 8 Irvine Row Carlisle, PA 17013 (717)243-9400 N QI . y _ s Cy \J RECEIVED OCT 0 52005 ROBERT C. STUMPF, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v : CIVIL ACTION - LAW PAMELA O'BREIN, NO. 03-160 Defendant IN CUSTODY COURT ORDER AND NOW, this 181, day of 6V(4-Oa , 2005, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation 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 d day of `? l 2005 at %A 5 U m. At this hearing, the father shall be the moving party and shall proceed initially with testimony. Counsel for the parties, or the parties themselves if they appear without counsel, 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, a summary of each parties position on these issues, a list of witnesses who will be called to testify on behalf of each party and a summary of the anticipated testimony of each witness. This memorandum shall be riled at least rive days prior to the mentioned hearing date. 2. Pending further Order of this Court, this Court's prior Order of March 3, 2005 shall remain in effect subject to the following modifications: A. Exchange of custody shall take place at the McDonald's at the Wal-Mart on PA Route 322. The parties shall insure that there are no arguments or negative verbal exchanges when the parties meet to exchange custody. B. Father's phone calls to the mother's home to speak with the minor children shall be limited to one time per day between the time frame of 7:30 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. If father calls and mother and mother and children are not available, mother shall initiate a call back to the father to insure that reasonable telephone contact does take place. BY THE COURT, Judge Edgar J. Bayley ccs'ca Diamondstone, Esquire / amela O'Brien CF T 4,U, C?, ? 9 u I I lI ,S L 9 ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff v PAMELA O'BREIN, Defendant Prior Judge: Edgar J. Bayley : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : NO. 03-160 : 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 children who are the subject of this litigation is as follows: Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991 and Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994. 2. A Conciliation Conference was held on September 22, 2005, with the following individuals in attendance: The mother, Pamela O'Brien, who appeared via telephone, and the father, Robert C. Stumpf O'Brien, with his counsel, Jessica Diamondstone, Esquire. 3. Father is seeking a modification of the existing Custody Order and is also seeking to have mother held in contempt on an allegation that she has not complied with the prior Order. An agreement could not be reached on the modification or the contempt issue, so a hearing is necessary. However, the parties did reach an agreement relative to modifying the existing Order for purposes of exchange of custody. 4. The Conciliator recommends an Order in the form as attached. /U - 3_ of DATE Hubert X. Gilr , Esquire Custody Co . for ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff/Petitioner V. PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 03-160 CIVIL TERM IN CUSTODY PETITION TO REQUEST ATTENDANCE OF MINOR CHILDREN Petitioner, Robert C. Stumpf, by and through his counsel, MidPenn Legal Services, states the following: 1. The above-captioned matter is scheduled for hearing on Thursday, November 3, 2005, at 8:45 a.m. 2. Petitioner believes that it is necessary for the Court to speak privately to each of the minor children involved in this custody matter in order to better ascertain the current situation. 3. Petitioner does not believe that Respondent will bring the children without a Court Order requiring that she do so. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court enter an Order requiring that Respondent bring both children to the November 3, 2005, custody hearing. Respectfully 7es 2fca Holst, Esquire MidPenn :Legal Services 401 East Louther Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-9400 ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff/Petitioner V. PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. CIVIL TERM CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jessica Holst, Esquire, of MidPenn Legal Services, attorney for Plaintiff, Robert C. Stumpf, hereby certify that I have served a copy of the forgoing Petition to Request Attendance of Minor Children on the following date and in the manner indicated below: U.S. First Class Mail Pamela O'Brien 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 Date: 10' -Q i - Jess ca HoAt, Esquire Mi enn Legal Services 401 East Louther Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717)243-9400 r- ? ,; ?? ??i OCT 2 5 2005P? ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff/Petitioner CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. : NO. 03-160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent : IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this ? day of 2005, upon consideration of the attached Petition, the Defendant is Ordered to bring the minor children, Robert Stumpf and Rachel Stumpf, to the hearing scheduled for Thursday, November 3, 2005, at 8:45 a.m. in Courtroom 2, Fourth Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. Distribution: Jessica Holst, Esquire ,Mf Penn Legal Services 401 East Louther Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Xamela O'Brien, pro se Defendant 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown PA 17057 G? ?. ? - .. v ' ROBERT C. STUMPF, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff/Petitioner : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. :NO. 03-160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent : IN CUSTODY PETITION TO REQUEST ATTENDANCE OF MINOR CHILDREN Petitioner, Robert C. Stumpf, by and through his counsel, MidPenn Legal Services, states the following: 1. The above-captioned matter is scheduled for hearing on Thursday, November 3, 2005, at 8:45 a.m. 2. Petitioner believes that it is necessary for the Court to speak privately to each of the minor children involved in this custody matter in order to better ascertain the current situation. 3. Petitioner does not believe that Respondent will bring the children without a Court Order requiring that she do so. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court enter an Order requiring that Respondent bring both children to the November 3, 2005, custody hearing. Respectfully Jes ca olst, Esquire MidPenn Legal Services 401 East Louther Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-9400 ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff/Petitioner V. PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. CIVIL TERM CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jessica Holst, Esquire, of MidPenn Legal Services, attorney for Plaintiff, Robert C. Stumpf, hereby certify that I have served a copy of the forgoing Petition to Request Attendance of Minor Children on the following date and in the manner indicated below: U.S. First Class Mail Date: 1o' Q I - J , Pamela O'Brien 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 Jess ca Rolyst, Esquire M? Penn Legal Services 401 East Louther Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717)243-9400 ;', ?;-,: ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, DEFENDANT 03-160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this q4-- day of November, 2005, following a hearing, I adjudicate Pamela O'Brien in civil contempt of the custody order of March 3, 2005. She may purge herself of contempt by strictly complying with the new custody order entered this date. By the Court, Edgar. Bayley, J. Jessica Diamondstone, Esquire For Plaintiff Pamela O'Brien, Pro se 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 :sal SGOZ ! S :C P,3 - AM t ?n ' ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, DEFENDANT 03-160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this q*-, day of November, 2005, following a hearing on the merits, IT IS ORDERED: (1) All prior custody orders are vacated and replaced with this order. (2) Pamela O'Brien shall have sole legal and physical custody of Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991. (3) Robert C. Stumpf and Pamela O'Brien shall have joint legal custody of Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994. (4) The mother shall have primary physical custody of Rachel. (5) The father shall have temporary physical custody of Rachel each Saturday from 10:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. (6) Exchanges for such periods of temporary physical custody shall occur at McDonald's at the Wal-Mart on PA Route 322. (7) The father may call Rachel on any day between 7:30 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. If the father calls and Rachel is not present the mother shall have Rachel call the father back when she returns home. By the Court, l 4 Edgar B. Bayley, J. {{ f, ,,1 ? p'l ij ?„} •4 t"C? ?? i1lJ ?'? 76?G ate, ,. I Jessica Diamondstone, Esquire For Plaintiff Pamela O'Brien, Pro se 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 :sal it ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff/Petitioner CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. : NO. 03-160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent : IN CUSTODY PETITION FOR CONTEMPT AND MODIFICATION Petitioner, Robert C. Stumpf, by and through his counsel, MidPenn Legal Services, states the following: 1. Plaintiff/Petitioner, hereinafter referred to as Father, resides at 1150-A Goodwill Drive, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania 17101. 2. Defendant/Respondent, hereinafter referred to as Defendant, resides at 308 Summit Ridge Drive, Middletown, Dauphin County, PA 17057. 3. The above-named parties are the natural parents of Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991 and Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994. 4. The current Custody Order, attached as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, is dated November 7, 2005. The Order, in pertinent part, grants Defendant sole legal and physical custody of Robert Stumpf, and grants the parties shared legal custody of Rachel Stumpf. Defendant has primary physical custody of Rachel, with Father having periods of temporary physical custody every Saturday from 10:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m., and reasonable telephone contact with Rachel when she is with Defendant. 5. Defendant has willfully disobeyed the Order in ways including, but not limited to, the following: a. Refusing to permit Father to exercise his periods of temporary physical custody in accordance with the Order. Since November 7th `h, when the current Order went into effect, Father should have had nine (9) visits with Rachel. As summarized below, seven of those visits were compromised or effectively eliminated by Defendant. i. On November 11`h, Defendant tried to unilaterally change the time designated for Father to pick-up Rachel. In addition, Rachel was unwilling to accompany Father to his residence because of threats and intimidation by Defendant and her boyfriend. ii. On November 18`h Father was deceived into believing that Rachel had made plans with a friend that interfered with the ordered custody schedule. Based on this deception, Father relinquished his visit on November 18`h iii. On November 26th Defendant did not bring Rachel to the exchange point. Father was there on time. iv. On December 3`d Defendant did not bring Rachel to the exchange point. Father was there on time. v. On December 17th Father declined visitation because he was ill. Father informed his daughter and Defendant. vi. On December 24th Father was denied a visit with Rachel. Instead, Father received a letter from Robert Stumpf. It was attached to his car while it was parked at Trinity House. A copy of the letter is attached hereto as "Exhibit B". vii. On December 31st, Defendant did not bring Rachel to the exchange point. Father was there on time. viii. On January 7th, Defendant did not bring Rachel to the exchange point. Father was there on time. b. Failing to allow Father reasonable telephone contact with Rachel. c. Refusing to communicate with Father about the custody schedule. 6. Defendant is not acting in Rachel's best interest for reasons including, but not limited to, the following: a. Defendant and her boyfriend have willfully denied Father partial physical custody of Rachel in ways set forth in Paragraph Five of this Petition for Contempt and Modification. b. This is the third time in the past year that Father has been forced to pursue a contempt action against Defendant. Following a hearing, this Court entered an Order on November 7, 2005, finding Defendant in contempt of the Court's March 3, 2005, Order. This Court ordered that Defendant could purge herself of contempt by "strictly complying with the new custody order entered this date." That Order is attached hereto as "Exhibit C" c. Defendant has deliberately and willingly disobeyed the November 7, 2005, Order. d. Defendant's actions in creating such a tense and negative atmosphere regarding custody causes stress for Rachel and makes Rachel a vehicle for Defendant to insult, harm, and otherwise cause difficulty for Father. e. Defendant and her boyfriend continually alienate Father which interferes with the appropriate and healthy father/daughter relationship that is imperative to Rachel's ongoing emotional development and well being. f. Defendant allows, and encourages, her boyfriend's aggressive and immature behavior. Since the most recent Order was entered in November 2005, Defendant has also encouraged Robert Stumpf to display the same negative and hostile behavior demonstrated by Defendant's boyfriend. This behavior takes place in front of Rachel; is unhealthy and dangerous to her well-being and interferes with her relationship with Father. g. Defendant's actions interfere with Father's ability to exercise his shared legal custody right to participate in major decisions regarding Rachel. 7. Father is entitled to modified periods of partial custody, which is in Rachel's best interest, for reasons including but not limited to the following: a. Father wants to maintain the relationships that he has established with Rachel. This Court has already determined the importance of maintaining a relationship between Father and Rachel and it is imperative that Rachel have regular and ongoing contact with Father for her emotional well being and development. b. Father is able to exercise his periods of partial custody as set forth in the November 7, 2005, order and wishes to have additional time to make up for the time lost as a result of Defendant's failure to comply with the existing Order. The failure to exercise periods of partial custody is the result of Defendant's and Defendant's Boyfriend's interference, not Father's lack of interest or determination to see Rachel. c. Father seeks a custody schedule to address holidays. 8. It is unknown whether Defendant is represented and counsel for Plaintiff is unable to request concurrence for the relief requested in this Petition. WHEREFORE, Father respectfully requests the following: a. That this Court find Defendant in contempt of the existing March 3, 2005, Court Order and enter an appropriate penalty as permitted under 23 Pa.C.S. §4346, including imprisonment up to six months, a fine up to $500, probation for up to six months, or an order for nonrenewal, suspension or denial of operating privileges pursuant to §4355. b. That this matter be scheduled for a custody conciliation to establish terms of a modified custody schedule. c. That Defendant and Father continue to share legal custody of Rachel. d. That Father's periods of partial custody be increased as follows: 1) Every Saturday from 10: 00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. 2) Every other Sunday from 10:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. e. That Father be granted reasonable contact via telephone and written correspondence with Rachel when she is in Defendant's custody, without interference or involvement of Defendant's boyfriend. f That Defendant's boyfriend be ordered to refrain from any interference or involvement with custody exchanges or telephone conversations between Father and Rachel. g. That Defendant provide Father with all information relevant to legal custody to which he is entitled such as school information, doctor's visits, etc., in a timely manner. h. Any other relief this Court finds just and proper. M' Penn Legal Services 4 1 East Louther Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-9400 ROBERT C. STUMPF, PLAINTIFF V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, DEFENDANT AND NOW, this IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 03-160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT q+, the merits, IT IS ORDERED: day of November, 2005, following a hearing on (1) All prior custody orders are vacated and replaced with this order. (2) Pamela O'Brien shall have sole legal and physical custody of Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991. (3) Robert C. Stumpf and Pamela O'Brien shall have joint legal custody of Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994. (4) The mother shall have primary physical custody of Rachel. (5) The father shall have temporary physical custody of Rachel each Saturday from 10:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. (6) Exchanges for such periods of temporary physical custody shall occur at McDonald's at the Wal-Mart on PA Route 322. (7) The father may call Rachel on any day between 7:30 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. If the father calls and Rachel is not present the mother shall have Rachel call the father back when she returns home. a By the Court, Edgar B. Bayley, J. /X/J/& 7 A Jessica Diamondstone, Esquire For Plaintiff Pamela O'Brien, Pro se 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown. PA 17057 0 :sal Y .- ? LAC ? 5 G?Cj f?:;cC,l? ??; 2???? Cc;r?2 - lC1Gz_ 1/,Jt 1 ?)/) key h L? 1p//4/ _/z //? h? ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, DEFENDANT 03-160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this f day of November, 2005, following a hearing, I adjudicate Pamela O'Brien in civil contempt of the custody order of March 3, 2005. She may purge herself of contempt by strictly complying with the new custody order entered this date. Jessica Diamondstone, Esquire For Plaintiff Pamela O'Brien, Pro se , 3 ?,x? t i -a F• a? 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 By the Court, XX { yX r Edgar T Bayley, J. sal az{ ?, In i C!?iNY9Vfi f k! hFri'.L' i 4 r'u ':+°••n`' 7174 and tim sal of said Cr?uri x? ?. PE. T a , prov . r? X-Xt????X L VERIFICATION The above-named Plaintiff, Robert c. stumpf, verifies that the statements made in the above Petition for contempt and modification are true and correct. Plaintiff understands that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: 110 104 Robert C. Stumpf ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff/Petitioner V. PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 03-160 CIVIL TERM CUSTODY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jessica Holst, Esquire, of MidPenn Legal Services, attorney for Plaintiff, Robert C. Stumpf, hereby certify that I have served a copy of the forgoing Petition for Contempt and Modification on the following date and in the manner indicated below: U.S. First Class Certified Mail, Return Receipt, Restricted Delivery Pamela O'Brien 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 Date: .k o Jessiepot'st, Esquire MidVerm Legal Services 401 East Louther Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717)243-9400 -, ,_ ,; _, C. S' ?. ?;: fl ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff/Petitioner V. PAMELA O'BRIEN Defendant/Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 03-160 CIVIL TERM CUSTODY PRAECIPE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS To the Prothonotary: Kindly allow, Robert C. Stumpf, Plaintiff, to proceed in forma au eris. I, Jessica Holst, attorney for the party proceeding in forma au eris, certify that I believe the party is unable to pay the costs and that I am providing free legal services to the party. Midredn Legal Services 401 East Louther Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-9400 ;, <:;> 3 , ROBERT C. STUMPF PLAINTIFF V. PAMELA O'BRIEN DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNS 03-160 CIVIL ACTION LAW IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, Friday, January 20, 2006 upon consideration of the at it is hereby directed that parties and their respective counsel appear before Hubert X. Gilroy, VANIA Complaint, the conciliator, at 4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle on Friday, February 17, 2000 at 8:30 AM for a Pre-Hearing Custody Conference. At such conference, an effort will be made to resolve t e issues in dispute; or if this cannot be accomplished, to define and narrow the issues to be heard by the court, and to rater into a temporary order. All children age five or older may also be present at the conference. 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 h arinv, FOR THE, COURT, Bv: /s/ Hubert X. Gilt Custody Conciliator The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County is required by law to compi, with the Americans with Disabilites Act of 1990. For information about accessible facilities and reasonable ac ommodations 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 OU DO NOT HAVE AN ATTORNEY OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE FFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL IIELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Telephone (717) 249-3166 ?? ? ? '??? ?,,? .? ?? S_.? ?? ?? ? ?? - _ ;;, "1 . ,' C`' ??? ??? ? ?,? oc` t ??- o?' ? ROBERT C. STUMPF, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 03-160 CIVIL ACTION - LAW PAMELA O'BRIEN, IN CUSTODY Defendant COURT ORDER AND NOW, this 1 day of \11 0W K , 2006, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows: 1. A hearing i4 scheduled in Court room No. 2 of the Cumberland Court Courthouse on the _0 day of '-+k j 2006 at _a_.m. The purpose of this hearing shall be to address the petition of the Father to hold the Mother in contempt for violation of the November 7, 2005 Custody Order. Counsel for the parties, or the parties themselves if they do not have an attorney, shall file with the Court and the opposing party or their counsel a Memorandum setting forth the history of custody in this case, the issues currently before the Court, a list of witnesses who will be called to testify at the hearing, and a summary of the anticipated testimony of each witness. This Memorandum shall be filed at least five days prior to the mentioned hearing date. 2. Pending further Order of this Court, this Court's Order of November 7, 2005 shall remain in place. Edgar B. Cc: Jessica Holst, Esquire Ms. Pamela O'Brien r71 BY THE COURT, ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 03-160 CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN CUSTODY Prior Judge: The Honorable Edgar B. Bayley 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 children who are the subject of this litigation is as follows: Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991 Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994 2. A Conciliation Conference was held on February 17, 2006 with the following individuals in attendance: The Mother, Pamela O'Brien, appeared via telephone conference The Father, Robert C. Stumpf, with his counsel, Jessica Hoist, Esquire 3. The parties were before the Court last November at which time Mother was held in contempt and allowed to purge her contempt if she abided by a new Order entered November 7, 2005. Father now petitions for contempt again, suggesting Mother is not abiding by the Order. At the conciliation conference, Mother suggested that sometimes she appears to deliver custody and the Father is not present, but she also acknowledged that other times she simply does not appear with the child. She suggests Rachel does not want to go visit the Father. The parties could not reach an agreement and it is clear that there are problems with respect to compliance with the Order. A hearing is required. Date: February2z , 2006 ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW 03-160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 23rd day of March, 2006, I adjudicate the Defendant in civil contempt. 1. The custody order of November 7, 2005, is amended to delete paragraph 5 and replace it as follows: 2. Father shall have temporary physical custody of Rachel every Sunday from 1:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. 3. All of the provisions of the custody order of November 7, 2005, shall remain in full force and effect. 4. The mother may purge herself of civil contempt by strictly complying with all terms of the order of November 7, 2005, as amended this date. Veessica F1+51tz, e'sau;;e MidPenn Legal Services 401 E. Louther Street Carlisle, PA 17012 For the Plaintiff -,;1amela O'Brien, Defendant Pro Se 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 pcb .R? CV i- PAGE 1 OF 1 ROBERT C. STUMPF SR., : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff Pro Se : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW PAMELA O'BRIEN, 03-160 CIVIL TERM Defendant NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF'S SWORN MOTION FOR IMMEDIATE EMERGENCY CUSTODY AND CONTEMPT PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, upon the accompanying pleadings attached thereto, the under- signed hereby provides the above-named Court, - and as the judge of the above-named court sees fit, to this Defendant, ( once this Defendant's current place of residence becomes known ) - notice of the Plaintiff's Sworn Motion for Immediate Emergency Custody and Contempt, thereby moving the above-named court to enter an Order granting the Plaintiff s request for Immediate Emergency Cus- tody of Rachel Stumpf, born June 9th, 1994, who is one of two children-in-common of the Plaintiff and this Defendant, and for a finding of this Defendant in Contempt pursuant to Pa.C.S. Title 23, Part VII, Chapter 61, § 6114.1, to include an order of Enforcement Action against this Defendant bringing a fine of no less than $1000, and a Term of Imprisonment of no less than 6 Months, as pun- ishment for the Defendant's intentional, willful, knowing, malicious, and persistent acts of Recalci- trant Non-Compliance and Interference with the Existing Custody Order in the above-listed matter, FORTHWITH, and in advance of any hearing in this matter, and for any other fair and equitable re- lief that judge may find to be just and appropriate. r 2/O rf a4A Robert C. Stumpf 1130 America Ave, West Babylon, NY 11703 .. r? ?l PAGE 1 OF 41 ROBERT C. STUMPF SR., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff Pro Se CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW PAMELA O'BRIEN, 03-160 CIVIL TERM Defendant PLAINTIFF'S SWORN MOTION FOR IMMEDIATE EMERGENCY CUSTODY AND CONTEMPT PAGE 2 OF 41 b TABLE OF CONTENTS: TABLE OF EXHIBITS ............................................................... PAGE 3 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ........................................................ PAGE 4 HISTORY OF CUSTODY ........................................................... PAGES 5 - 7 Sub Part A. Preliminary Statement ............................................. PAGES 8 - 9 Sub Part B. Threats of Rape Against Rachel made by Miller....... PAGES 9 -13 Sub Part C. Defendants Act of Absconding with Rachel without pro- viding notice to either the Court, or to the Plaintiff of Rachel's new place of residence, and without providing contact information for the Plaintiff to communicate with Rachel via telephone ....................................... PAGES 13 -15 Sub Part D. Recalcitrant Acts of Non-Compliance And Interference with the Order of the Court committed by this Defendant and Miller ...................................................................................... PAGES 15 - 26 Sub Part E. Acts of Child Abuse Against Rachel Committed by this Defendant and Miller ................................................................ PAGES 27 - 32 Sub Part F. Acts of this Defendant and Miller Causing or Attempting to Cause, the Alienation of Rachel's Affections for the Plaintiff ............. PAGES 32 - 33 Sub Part G. Prayer for Relief ..................................................... PAGES 33 - 41 PAGE 3 OF 41 1 TABLE OF EXHIBITS: Exhibit A. Existing Custody Order, dated November 7th, 2005. Exhibit B. The "Pre-Hearing Memorandum of Plaintiff', dated March 1 st, 2006, com- posed by Jessica Holst of MidPenn Legal Services. Exhibit C. Plaintiff's "Petition For Contempt And Modification", dated January 13th, 2006, also by Jessica Holst. Exhibit D. Amendment to the Order dated March 23rd, 2006. Exhibit E. Conciliation Conference Summary Report by Hubert X Gilroy, dated Feb- ruary 22nd, 2006. PAGE 4 OF 41 1 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES: 1. Vaughan's English Common Pleas Reports .....................................................Page 8 2. Bartnicki v. Vopper, No. 99-1687 (U.S. May 21, 2001) ....................................... Page 11 3. Title 23, Pa.C.S. Chapter 61, Section 6102 ..................................................... Page 26 4. Title 18, Pa. C.S., Chapter 31 (b), Section 3121 ............................................... Page 33 5. United States v. Harris, 403 U.S. 573 ( 1971 ) ..................................................Page 33 6. 23 Pa.C.S. Section 4346 ........................................................................... Page 35 7. Coke on Magna Charta and Old Acts, 479 ......................................................Page 38 8. Campbell v. Holt, 115 U.S. 620 .................................................................. Page 38 9. Branches Principia Legis et Equitatis ............................................................ .Page 38 10. Virginia Coupon Cases, 114 U.S. 270, 303 ..................................................... .Page 38 11. Berlin v. Berlin, 239 Md. 52, 210 A.2d 380 (1965) ........................................... .Page 38 12. Walden v Walden, 112 A.D.2d 1035, 492 N.Y.S.2d 827 (1987), ........................... .Page 38 13. Gentry v. Simmons, 754 S.W.2d 579 (Mo. Ct.App. 1988 ) .................................. .Page 38 14. Eatherton v Eatherton, 725 S.W.2d 125, 128 (Mo. [Ctj App. (1971) .......................Page 39 15. Cornell v. Cornell, 809 S.W. 2d 869 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991 ) ...................................Page 39 16. Young v. Young, 212 A.D.2d 114, 628 N.Y.S.2d 957 ( 1995 ) ............................. .Page 39 17. Sullivan v. Sullivan, 216 A.D.2d 627, N.Y.S.2d 829 ( 1995 ) ............................... .Page 39 10 18. Betancourt v Boughton, 204 A.D. 2d. 804, 611 N.Y.S.2d 941 ( 1994 ) ....................Page 39 19. Jeschke v Wockenfuss, 534 N.W.2d 602 ( S.D. 1995 ) .......................................Page 39 20. Sigav Sigg, 905 P.2d 908 (Utah Ct.App. 1995 ) ............................................. .Page 39 21. Ready v. Ready, 906 P.2d 382 (Wyo. 1995 ) ................................................. .Page 39 22. Maloney v. Maloney, 208 A.D.2d 603 N.Y.S.2d 190, 191 ( 1994 ) ........................ .Page 39 PAGE 5 OF 41 1 HISTORY OF CUSTODY 1. The existing Custody Order, dated November 7th, 2005, is attached as Exhibit A, and incorpo- rated herein by reference. 2. Concerning the two children in common of the Plaintiff and this Defendant, the Order granted Sole Legal and Physical Custody of Robert Jr., to this Defendant, and granted Joint Legal Custody of Rachel, ( born June 9th, 1994 ), with this Defendant having Primary Physical Custody of Rachel, and that Plaintiff shall have periods of weekly temporary custody of Rachel. 3. The Order also granted that the Plaintiff shall have communication on via Telephone with Rachel on any day between the hours of 7:30 PM, and 8:00 PM, and specified that if the Plaintiff should call at a time when Rachel is not present, that this Defendant shall have Rachel call the Plaintiff back when Ra- r chel returns home, and that the Plaintiff shall have written communication with Rachel. 4. The "Pre-Hearing Memorandum of Plaintiff % dated March 1 st, 2006, composed by Jessica Holst of MidPenn Legal Services, is attached as Exhibit B, as well as the Plaintiff's "Petition For Contempt And Modification", dated January 13th, 2006, also by Jessica Holst, which is attached as Exhibit C, and these documents are incorporated herein by reference. Furthermore, Plaintiff submits that the fore- going documents contain certain important historical information about the circumstances which have led directly to the Plaintiff's previous actions before the court seeking redress of the Plaintiff's myriad grievances. 5. The Amendment to the Order dated March 23rd, 2006, is attached as Exhibit D, and was en- tered in response to a request made by the Plaintiff who wished to change the day which the Plaintiff may exercise his Parental Right to Temporary Physical Custody of Rachel, from Saturday, to Sunday, with all other provisions of the November 7th, 2005 Order, hereinafter Order, remaining in full force and 10 effect, and,.. PAGE 6 OF 41 6. The Amendment to the Order included a finding of this Defendant in Civil Contempt, and set forth that this Defendant "may purge hersel of Civil Contempt by strictly complying with all terms of the Order of November 7, 2005. ", in addition, the Judge of the Court informed this Defendant that if this pattern of recalcitrant Non-Compliance with the Order of the Court were to continue, that this De- fendant would suffer a term of imprisonment. 7. In the four months following the entering of the March 23rd, 2006 Amendment to the Order, this Defendant, for the most part, complied with the terms and conditions of the Order, however, in sub- sequent months, this Defendant returned to complete Non-Compliance with the terms and conditions of the Order, hence, this Defendant and Jeff Miller, have completely eliminated ALL periods of temporary physical custody of Rachel, hence, the Plaintiff has not seen Rachel since December 24th, 2006, and also, this Defendant and Miller have almost completely without exception, eliminated telephone com- munication as well as all written and electronic/computer based communication between the Plaintiff and Rachel. 8. This Defendant and Jeff Miller have willfully, knowingly, and with malicious intent, stood athwart all efforts by the Plaintiff to schedule custody exchanges with this Defendant, which has di- rectly resulted in causing the Plaintiff to make no less than FIVE fruitless, and costly excursions from his home in West Babylon, New York, to the exchange location in Pennsylvania. Subsequent to the above-referenced fruitless trips, the Plaintiff, due to the vexatious acts of elimination and/or interfer- ence with the Plaintiff's Parental Rights, committed by this Defendant and Miller, discontinued his fu- tile excursions to the exchange location. ( See Plaintiff's Motion Sub-Part D, averments 29-32 and all sub-parts ) 9. This Defendant and Jeff Miller have consistently demonstrated a recalcitrant disregard for the Orders of the Court, even going so far as to openly announce their intention to disregard the Order of the Court during telephone communication with the Plaintiff, and announcing their reasons for so do- ing, specifically, that this Defendant and Jeff Miller believe that the Order of the Court is a Legal Nul- lity, because, inter alia, of the Plaintiff's change of residence from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 0 to the State of New York. PAGE 7 OF 41 10. Pursuant to the foregoing, Miller has made repeated statements to the Plaintiff during numerous telephone "conversations", announcing his intentions to interfere with the Order due to Miller's belief, apparently, that the Plaintiff, quote, "Was not a man."; end quote, hence, Miller fails to recognize the Plaintiff's inclusion into the class of beings who would be considered "Men", and furthermore, Miller has set forth a system of "standards" which Miller has informed the Plaintiff, must be met, before Miller would permit the Plaintiff to exercise his parental right to temporary physical custody of Rachel. 11. In addition, Miller has announced to the Plaintiff during numerous telephone conversations, Miller's intentions to continue to persistently interfere with the Order, unless and until, the Plaintiff ad- mits to Miller, the Plaintiffs stupidity, for inter alia, allowing Rachel to visit the Plaintiff while he was enrolled in an alcohol rehabilitation program, hence, Miller has organized his own system of laws, forms and solemnities, etc., which are in contradistinction to the Rule of Law pursuant to American Ju- risprudence, apparently, founded upon Miller's bizarre and continually changing, absolutely Jim Crowesque, "Confession" requirements. D 12. Since the time of the Amendment to the order, Jeff Miller, on several occasions, has committed numerous acts of violence and abuse, against Rachel and Miller has promulgated numerous terroristic threats to commit violent acts and acts of sexual abuse against both Rachel, and the Plaintiff. This De- fendant is well aware of these despicable acts by Miller, and this Defendant, has completely acqui- esced. 13. All of the foregoing thereby making it necessary for the Plaintiff to bring the instant action to the court for the purpose of seeking remedy. PAGE 8 OF 41 ROBERT C. STUMPF SR., IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff Pro Se CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW PAMELA O'BRIEN, 03-160 CIVIL TERM Defendant PLAINTIFF'S SWORN MOTION FOR IMMEDIATE EMERGENCY CUSTODY AND CONTEMPT COMES NOW, Robert C. Stumpf Sr., hereinafter, Plaintiff, and proceeding Pro Se, bringing his Sworn Motion For Immediate Emergency Custody and Contempt, to the above-named court and this Defendant, as follows: A. Preliminary Statement. I. First and foremost, the Plaintiff hereby states that under penalty of perjury that each and every statement / averment herein contained is absolutely true and correct, and furthermore, the Plaintiff swears that each and every statement averment contained throughout this motion, is founded upon Cer- tain Knowledge, and,.. II. The Plaintiff respectfully requests that the above-listed matter be bought to a conclusion only after a thorough examination of these pleadings, and the official court record of the instant case, and that any determination be based upon nothing less than thoughtful contemplation of the totality of the circumstances of this matter, hence, "No document or statement is superfluous or wordy in context 0 where there is nothing that can he omitted," Vauyhan's English Common Pleas Reports, and,... PAGE 9 OF 41 III. The Plaintiff submits that this action which he is seeking to initiate by the filing of these plead- ings> emanates from> (1) the fact that Several Significant Chan es in the Circumstances of the above- listed matter have recently occurred, which affect the welfare of Rachel Stumpf, ( age 13 ), hereinafter Rachel, who is one of two children-in-common, of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and that further- more, the Plaintiff submits that these circumstances demand the Immediate Attention and Immediate Action of the Judge of the above-named court, in order to bring about an appropriate remedy, which is in the best interests of Rachel, and also from, (2) the fact that both this Defendant and Jeff Miller, here- inafter Miller, who is the Live-In, Non-Marital Partner of this Defendant, have acted in a manner which has caused the Plaintiff to be completely unable to exercise his Parental Rights pursuant to the terms and conditions of the existing custody order, and... IV. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, the Plaintiff submits that first and foremost in its import among the above-referenced significant changes in the circumstances, is the fact that Miller, has, while acting as the agent of this Defendant and with this Defendant's knowledge and consent, committed a series of offenses against the Plaintiff and against Rachel, which are described within the following . sub-parts of these pleadings, styled as statements of undisputed fact and formulated as numbered aver- ments, to wit: B. Threats of Rave Against Rachel made by Miller: 1. The Plaintiff hereby moves the above-named court to take judicial notice of the undisputed fact, that Miller, has recently made repeated threats to commit the crime of Rape, against Rachel, and, 2. It is an undisputed fact that Miller, has repeatedly announced his threats to commit the crime of Rape against Rachel, and that Miller has formulated / phrased his threats in the most unambiguous of possible terms, including, but by no means limited to the phrase, quote, "I'm going to FUCK your daughter", end quote, and,... 0 3. It is an undisputed fact that the above-referenced threats, were spoken by Miller, to the Plaintiff, PAGE 10 OF 41 P during several recent telephone calls, and,... 4. It is an undisputed fact that several of the above-referenced phone calls, during which Miller promulgated his threats to commit the crime of Rape against Rachel, were initiated by the Plaintiff to this Defendants residence, for the intended purpose of (1) Scheduling custody exchanges with this De- fendant, so that the Plaintiff might exercise his parental right of weekly temporary custody of Rachel, pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in the existing custody order, and also, (2) So that the Plaintiff may exercise his parental right to reasonable telephone communication with Rachel, pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in the existing custody order, and that several other phone calls during which Miller promulgated his threats of Rape against Rachel, were initiated by Miller, to the Plaintiff's cell phone, and,... 5. It is an undisputed fact that the Plaintiff, in order to marshal hard evidence of the above- referenced threats of Rape against Rachel made by Miller, and fearing that the Plaintiff would have none but hear-say allegations as evidence of these threats, the Plaintiff created tape recordings of the . above-referenced phone calls during which these threats were being made, and,... 6. It is an undisputed fact that the Plaintiff is in possession of the original copy of the above- referenced tape recorded phone calls contained on standard audio cassette tapes, and,... 7. It is an undisputed fact that Miller consented to the Plaintiffs recording of the phone calls by expressly, and repeatedly, conveying his consent in clear language, and in the most unambiguous terms possible, for instance, on several occasions, when the Plaintiff informed Jeff Miller that the phone calls were being recorded, Miller replied, "You can record all you want, it won't stand up in court."; and, 7-A. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that the above-referenced statement by Miller constitutes Miller's consent to the Plaintiff s recording of the phone calls between the parties, ID therefore it can rightly be said that both parties to the call consented to the recording of the phone calls, and PAGE II OF 41 7-B. Pursuant to the foregoing averment and averment sub-part, it is an undisputed fact that the Plaintiff is in violation of no laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania or any other U.S. State, by his recording of the phone calls, notwithstanding the fact that even if Miller had not consented to the tape recording of the phone calls, (1) Miller's persistent threats of violence, hence, threats to perpetrate criminal acts by the Non-Consenting Party, and also (2) Miller's knowing, willful, intentional, mali- cious, and incessant admissions regarding his acts of interference with the Order of the Court, and Miller's repeated pronouncements of his intention to continue to act in direct contradistinction to the terms and conditions of the existing custody order, would constitute an exception to the letter and the spirit of any law proscribing the tape recording of the phone calls, hence, the original intent of the stat- ute/s proscribing the creation of such tape recordings of phone conversations, and that such a fact would automatically take legal precedence over the Non-Consenting Party's right to privacy of the phone call, and would constitute a fact which would also be sufficient to divest the court of criminal ju- risdiction to pursue criminal charges against the Plaintiff, since it could not reasonably be argued that it was the intent of the legislature of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to protect those who make 0 threats of violence via telephone, and/or, those who openly defy valid orders of the courts, and,... 8. Further to the foregoing point, it is an undisputed fact that Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, commenting on the privacy rights of a Non-Consenting Party to a tape recorded phone call, stated that, "the speaker had little or no legitimate interest", in the privacy of the call, "because of the suggestion of violence, a wrongful act", hence, the judge of the court should take judicial notice of the fact that the United States Supreme Court placed the interests of public safety, above the privacy rights of a Non-Consenting Parry to a recorded phone call. Bartnicki v. Power. No. 99-1687 (U.S. May 21, 2001), and,... 9. It is an undisputed fact that the above-referenced threats of Rape against Rachel made by Miller were, at each and every instance, clearly audible to Rachel at the time and place that Miller uttered those threats, thus placing Rachel in reasonable fear of imminent sexual assault, and,... i 10. It is an undisputed fact that this Defendant has been present at the times Miller has made the above-referenced threats of Rape against Rachel, and that this Defendant is fully aware of these threats PAGE 12 OF 41 and has taken no action whatsoever to prevent and/or discourage Miller from promulgating these despi- cable threats, knowing full well the injury these threats caused to both Rachel, and to the Plaintiff, and, 11. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that this Defendant, by and through her tacit consent, has given her agent, Miller, license to continue to indiscriminately promulgate these despicable threats against Rachel, and has permitted and even encouraged Miller to promulgate state- ments to the Plaintiff, the exclusive intended purpose of which, is to severely trouble the mind and the feelings, of the Plaintiff and Rachel, and to inflict extreme emotional anguish, and,... 12. It is an undisputed fact that the tape recording of the above-referenced phone call during which Miller promulgated his threats against Rachel, was heard by numerous other individuals who would be available to offer testimony either in person, or by sworn affidavit, to the foregoing undisputed facts, should these individuals be called upon to do so, by the above-named court, and,... 13. It is an undisputed fact that Miller is a habitual perpetrator of crimes, and that he has an exten- sive criminal record, and that Miller has, on at least one occasion, committed acts of physical violence against a Female Victim, for which he has been Arrested, Charged, Prosecuted, and Convicted, within the territorial boundaries of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and,... 14. It is an undisputed fact that the Plaintiff has good cause to believe that Miller has either carried out his threats of Rape against Rachel, or that Miller will soon carry out his threats of Rape against Ra- chel, because Miller has, over a period of time spanning several years time, demonstrated an open dis- respect for the Rule of Law, and Miller has also exhibited an extraordinary exuberance to commit acts intended to cause extreme inconvenience, annoyance and alarm to the Plaintiff, and to commit acts which are intended to harass and irreparably harm and injure the Plaintiff, and,... 15. It is an undisputed fact that in January 2007, the Plaintiff reported the above-referenced threats of Rape against Rachel made by Miller to the Swatara Township Police Department, and that no action was taken by the police and furthermore, that the Plaintiff was told by Police that the threats of Rape PAGE 13 OF 41 against Rachel uttered by Miller, was quote, "A matter for the Family Courts to Decide."; end quote, Plaintiff reported an additional incident of threats of Rape against Rachel made by in Miller, to the Nassau County Police Department ( NY ), in March 2007, yet, no action was taken in re- sponse to the Plaintiff s report, and,.... 16. It is an undisputed fact that on or about the day of May 21 st, 2007, during telephone communi- cation, Miller made threats to use firearms against the Plaintiff C. Defendants Act of Absconding with Rachel without providing notice to either the Court, or to the Plaintiff of Rachel's new place of residence, and without providing contact information for the Plaintiff to communicate with Rachel via telephone: 1. The Plaintiff hereby moves the above-named court, to take Judicial Notice of the undisputed fact that this Defendant has Absconded with Rachel from her former residence at 308 Summit Ridge Drive in Middletown, PA, to a location unknown to the Plaintiff, without providing notice to either the Court or to the Plaintiff, as to Rachel's current place of residence, and,... 2. It is an undisputed fact that the Plaintiff was informed by the Vice Principle of the George W. Feaser Middle School in the town of Middletown, PA., on March 23rd, 2007, that Rachel was removed from that school by this Defendant, and transferred to the Susquehanna Township Middle School, and, 3. It is an undisputed fact that this Defendant has a history of prior acts of absconding without pro- viding notice to either the Court, or to the Plaintiff, specifically, in 2002, and then again in 2004, and, 4. It is an undisputed fact that the Defendant maintains the phone service for the telephone number 717-939-1022, presumably, to create the illusion that the Defendant and Rachel still reside at 308 Sum- 11 mit Ridge Drive in the town of Middletown as her primary residence, when in fact they no longer re- side there, and,... PAGE 14 OF 41 5. It is an undisputed fact that on or about the date of June 9th, 2007, the Plaintiff received a tele- phone call from Corporal Sine of the Susquehanna Township Police Department, hereinafter Sine, and that the Plaintiff informed Sine of the following: A. That Miller had phoned the Plaintiff and promulgated several threats to commit acts of violence against the Plaintiff and against Rachel, and,... B. That this Defendant was a habitual violator of the terms and conditions of an existing custody order of the above-named court, and,... C. That this Defendant had absconded with Rachel without providing notice to either the above- named court or to the Plaintiff, and,... 6. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that during the telephone communi- 10 referred to in the previous averment, Sine informed the Plaintiff of the following: A. That Miller and this Defendant had made complaints to the police against the Plaintiff, appar- ently, due to the Plaintiffs daily phone calls ( between the hours of 7:30 PM and 8 PM ), to the resi- dence which was known by the Plaintiff to be the last known residence of this Defendant, notwith- standing the fact that the Plaintiff had informed Sine of the terms and conditions of the existing custody order which sets forth, inter alia, that the Plaintiff is within his legal rights to telephone communication with Rachel daily between the hours of 7:30 PM, and 8 PM, and,... B. That Sine had requested of Police Officer Rowe, that she locate Rachel to ascertain that Rachel had not been harmed, and,... C. That Sine would not reveal to the Plaintiff the nature and/or, extent and/or, the findings of 0 Rowe's investigation, and/or, the location where Rachel was currently residing, and,... PAGE 15 OF 41 D. That Sine had contacted the Lower Swatera Township Police Department to request that the residence at 308 Summit Ridge Drive in Middletown PA be surveyed by the police, and,... E. That Sine was informed by the Lower Swatera Township Police Department, that the residence at 308 Summit Ridge Drive, upon close up inspection, appeared to be abandoned / vacant, and,.... 7. Pursuant to averments # 5, & 6 of this section, it is an undisputed fact that Sine demanded that the Plaintiff, "was not to call there"; (there = 717-939-1022 ), and warned the Plaintiff of enforcement action and "High Fines", which would be bought against the Plaintiff, should he continue to make phone calls to 717-939-1022,, and,... 8. Further to the foregoing averments in this Sub-Part, it is an undisputed fact that the Plaintiff, on or about the date of June 21st, 2007, communicated with Police Chief Whitmer of the Susquehanna Township Police Department, who also demanded of the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff was not to phone 10 this Defendant's residence, notwithstanding the fact that the Plaintiff had informed Chief Whitmer of the terms and conditions of the existing custody order concerning telephone communication. D. Recalcitrant Acts of Non-Compliance And Interference with the Order of the Court commit- ted by the Defendant and Miller: 1. The Plaintiff hereby moves the above-named court, to take Judicial Notice of the undisputed fact that due to this Defendants persistent and absolute disregard for the terms and conditions of the ex- isting custody order, and also, to the persistent acts of obstruction and interference of Miller, the Plaintiff has been completely unable to exercise his Parental Right to Temporary Custody of Rachel since December 24th. 2006, whereupon Rachel, sobbed inconsolably in the presence of the Plaintiff, and expressed her deep animosity for Miller, and,... 2. It is an undisputed fact that during the most recent hearing conducted in connection with the i above-listed matter in the above-listed court on March 23rd, 2006, Judge Edgar B. Bayley reached a determination, as he had during SEVERAL other previous hearings on this matter, that this Defendant PAGE 16 OF 41 was in Contempt of the Order of the Court, and,... 3. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that Judge Bayley, during the hear- ing conducted in connection with the above-listed matter on March 23rd, 2006, set forth, that this De- fendant may avoid punishment for her contemptuous acts, only by and through, her strict compli- ance with the Order of the Court, and,.. . 4. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that the judge of the above-named court should take judicial notice of the fact that Judge Bayley, on March 23rd, 2006, issued a warning to this Defendant, that if this Defendant should fail to strictly comply with the Order, thus, if this De- fendant should continue to act in a manner which would cause the Plaintiff to once again petition this court seeking remedy, that the Judge of the Court would order that the Defendant shall be incarcer- ated, and,... 5. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that since December 24th, 2006, to the present, this Defendant, and her agent Miller, have willfully, knowingly, intentionally, and mali- ciously, STOOD ATHWART EACH AND EVERY ATTEMPT made by the Plaintiff, to exercise his Parental Rights pursuant to the Order, and,... 6. It is an undisputed fact that the judge of the above-named court should take judicial notice of the fact that since December 24th, 2006, to the present, this Defendant, and Miller have intentionally, willfully, knowingly, maliciously, and persistently acted in a manner which has caused the Absolute Elimination of ALL of the Plaintiffs Parental Rights pursuant to the Order of the Court, thereby causing the Absolute Elimination of the Plaintiffs relationship with Rachel, and,... 7. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that due to the above-referenced conduct of both this Defendant and Miller, that the Plaintiff has, since December 24th, 2006, been completely without exceation, unable to: A. Exercise his Parental Right to Temporary Physical Custody of Rachel. PAGE 17 OF 41 B. Communicate with Rachel by Telephone. C. Communicate with Rachel by Written and/or Electronic Correspondence. D. Be apprised of doctor visits and/or, medical records of either Rachel or Robert Jr. E. Be apprised of the children's school records. 8. It is an undisputed fact that since December 24th, 2006, to the present, this Defendant, almost completely without exception, has persistently avoided, and/or, refused, and/or, neglected to engage in communication with the Plaintiff for the purpose of scheduling custody exchanges, notwithstanding the Plaintiff's persistent attempts to communicate via telephone with this Defendant for the purpose of scheduling custody exchanges, and,... 9. It is an undisputed fact that since December 24th, 2006, to the present, this Defendant has, completely without exception, failed to return the Plaintiffs phone calls, in response to dozens of phone messages recorded by the Plaintiff on this Defendant's home answering machine, and,... 10 10. It is an undisputed fact that since December 24th, 2006, to the present, Miller has incessantly interfered with and obstructed the persistent attempts of the Plaintiff to initiate telephone communica- tion with this Defendant, for the purpose of scheduling custody exchanges, and,... 10 - A. It is an undisputed fact that since December 24th, 2006, to the present, Miller has incessantly blocked / sabotaged / obstructed and interfered with the Plaintiff's daily attempts to communicate with Rachel via telephone, hence disallowing communication between the Plaintiff and Rachel, hence, com- pletely eliminating all telephone communication between the Plaintiff and Rachel, and with Miller tak- ing every opportunity to employ his peculiar ill humor, foul language, and obvious poorness of charac- ter for the intended purpose of causing great vexation and annoyance, to the Plaintiff, and,... 11. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that Miller has committed these acts of incessant interference, by harassing, insulting and verbally abusing the Plaintiff, and by making statements which are exclusively intended to trouble the mind and feelings of both the Plaintiff and Ra- chel, on each and every occasion that Miller has been presented with the opportunity to do so, and,... 0 PAGE 18 OF 41 12. It is an undisputed fact that since December 24th, 2006, to the present, this Defendant and ' Miller have eliminated all written communication between the Plaintiff and Rachel, and that this Defen- dant and Miller have refused to accept delivery of, and/or, forward to Rachel, cards and letters which the Plaintiff has sent to Rachel via Certified Mail, and furthermore, Miller has admitted to the fact that he has intentionally failed to accept and/or forward these written communications to Rachel, during several telephone communications with the Plaintiff, and that these cards and letters have been returned to the Plaintiff, and that the Plaintiff is in possession of these returned cards and letters, and,... 13. It is an undisputed fact that since December 24th, 2006, to the present, this Defendant has per- sistently failed to provide the Plaintiff with any information whatsoever, concerning the children's school records, and/or, medical records, and,... 14. It is an undisputed fact that this Defendant, since December 24th, 2007, has willfully, know- ingly, and intentionally failed on numerous occasions, to appear with Rachel at the custody exchange location, subsequent to numerous messages from the Plaintiff recorded on this Defendant's home an- 10 swering machine, setting forth the Plaintiff's intention to be present at the exchange location, and,... 14-A. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact of significant importance, that the Plaintiff has never failed to appear at the exchange location subsequent to his attempts to schedule a custody exchange with this Defendant, by recording messages on this Defendant's home answering ma- chine, thereby setting forth the Plaintiff's intentions to be present at the exchange location on a specific date, and that the Plaintiff has been present every time he had stated he would do so,... 15. It is an undisputed fact that the Plaintiff has telephoned this Defendant's residence daily since December 24th, 2006, pursuant to the terms and condition of the Order, seeking to either: A. Communicate to this Defendant the Plaintiff's intention to exercise his Parental Right to Tem- porary Custody of Rachel pursuant to the Order, and to coordinate the exchange with this Defendant, or,... 10 B. Exercise his Parental Right to telephone communication with Rachel, and,.. PAGE 19 OF 41 0 16. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that almost completely without ex- ception, when the Plaintiff has phoned the residence of this Defendant, he is only able to: A. Record a voice message on this Defendant's Home Answering Machine, or,... B. Speak to Miller. 17. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that the message typically recorded by the Plaintiff, on this Defendant's Home Answering Machine, respectfully sets forth: A. The Plaintiff s pronouncements of his intention to be present at the Custody Exchange Location at the appropriate day, and time, pursuant to the Court Order, in order to exercise his Parental Right to Temporary Custody of Rachel, and,... P B. The Plaintiff s request that this Defendant return the Plaintiff's call for the purpose of confirm- ing that she has received the Plaintiff s message, and to inform the Plaintiff as to whether or not there is any problem, and/or, reason why this Defendant would be unable to travel to the exchange point with Rachel on the date specified by the Plaintiff, consistent with the terms and conditions of the order, and, C. The Plaintiff s pronouncements of his intention to speak with Rachel via telephone, and, to re- quest that this Defendant have Rachel call him back pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Order. 18. It is an undisputed fact that the recorded greeting message on this Defendant's home answering machine, is frequently changed by Miller, so that a caller who phones the residence during the Plain- tiff s court designated call time, will hear a vexatious recorded greeting message on this Defendant's Home Answering Machine, and,... 0 19. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that several minutes before and/or, PAGE 20 OF 41 after the Plaintiff's court designated time which the Plaintiff is permitted to phone this Defendant's resi- dence, the recorded message on this Defendant's home answering machine is returned to the usual, sig- nificantly more cordial, greeting message, which is intended to be heard by all other callers but the Plaintiff, and,... 20. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, the Plaintiff submits that the changing of the greeting mes- sage on this Defendant's home answering machine by Miller, is one of a multiplicity of vexatious acts performed on a regular and continuing basis by Miller, and that this act is performed with the exclusive purpose being, to cause great aggravation and annoyance to the Plaintiff, and,... 21. It is an undisputed fact that this Defendant has on at least one occasion, over the last several years, phoned the Plaintiff in order to reprimand him for making statements expressing his love for his children during the Plaintiffs recorded messages entered upon this Defendant's home answering ma- chine, as though the Plaintiff, by making such statements, had perpetrated some horrific act which was not to be tolerated, and,... 10 22. It is an undisputed fact that during the overwhelming majority of the Plaintiffs daily attempts to exercise his Parental Right to telephone communication with Rachel, the Plaintiff is only able to speak to Miller, who diligently makes it his business, to daily serve the function in this Defendant's residence, as Guardian of the Phone Service To The Dwelling, at least, during those times which the Plaintiff is permitted to call, pursuant to the Order, and,... 23. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, the Plaintiff submits that Miller takes great pleasure at the Plaintiff's frustration, and anguish, at the Plaintiff s inability to exercise his Parental Right to telephone communication with Rachel, as though it were a form of entertainment for Miller, and,... 24. It is an undisputed fact that during a telephone call to this Defendant's dwelling, made on Jan. 29th, 2007, at approximately 7:35 PM, by the Plaintiff, for the intended purpose of speaking with Ra- chel, the following "communication" took place between the Plaintiff and Miller: PAGE 21 OF 41 Miller - Hello Plaintiff - Hello, may I speak to Rachel please. Miller - I don't think so. (sarcastically) Plaintiff - Excuse me? Miller - Why don't you just put a gun to your head and get it over with?,...You're an Ass-Hole,.... Fuck you...... How stupid are you,.....You're not even a man,.....When you turn into a man I'll let you talk to Rachel. Plaintiff - You are in violation of the Court Order. Miller - You don't live in Pennsylvania anymore, so you don't have a Court Order,...You can keep calling here but you're just wasting your time. ***Subsequent to the above-referenced exchange, Miller discontinued the call by hanging up. *** 25. It is an undisputed fact that the Plaintiff phoned the residence of this Defendant on January 22nd, 2007, at approximately 7:50 PM, at which point the phone was "picked up", and then immedi- ately, "hung-up", without so much as a word being spoken, and when the Plaintiff phoned back again just seconds later, he heard the voice of Miller saying, quote: "Don't you hear the phone go click, click. " end quote, upon which, the Plaintiff was again "hung-up on", and,... 26. It is an undisputed fact that among a multiplicity of vulgar and offensive terms and phrases rou- tinely used by Miller during telephone communication with the Plaintiff, include, but are by no means limited to the following terms and phrases: A. "Pam is sucking my cock right now." B. "You're a piece of shit." C. "You're a fucking ass-hole." D. "Fuck You, Mother Fucker." E. "Rachel calls ME `Daddy' now." F. "It's Valentines Day, I think Pam's going to give me some ass tonight." PAGE 22 OF 41 0 26 - A. It is an undisputed fact that the Plaintiff is in possession of the tape recordings of certain "conversations" between himself and Miller, during which Miller uses the above-listed terms and phrases, and that Miller was a consenting party to the tape recording of the phone calls, and,... 27. Further to the issue of Miller's inappropriate language during his communications to the Plain- tiff, it is an undisputed fact that the above-referenced pronouncements, and many other equally offen- sive and inappropriate statements by Miller which are not listed, are, on a regular and continuing basis, clearly audible to this Defendant, Rachel, and Robert Jr., at the time and place which Miller indiscrimi- nately utters them, and,... 28. It is an undisputed fact that the above-described species of "communication", between the Plaintiff and Miller, is typical of the abuses which the Plaintiff suffers on a daily basis, while simply attempting to exercise his Parental Rights to telephone communication with Rachel, pursuant to the Or- r der, and,... 29. It is an undisputed fact that this Defendant and Miller have openly, and repeatedly stated / ad- mitted to the Plaintiff during recent exchanges conducted via telephone, that the Defendant and Miller intend to continue to prevent the Plaintiff from the exercise his Parental Rights to Temporary Custody of Rachel, as well as telephone and/or written, and/or electronic communication with Rachel, unless and until, the Plaintiff subscribes to a written agreement granting Sole Custody of Rachel to this Defen- dant, and that only after signing such written agreement, would this Defendant and Miller possibly con- sider allowing the Plaintiff to see Rachel, and/or, to communicate with Rachel, thus constituting, appar- ently, a sort of pathetic attempt to "Blackmail" the Plaintiff to enter into such an agreement, and,... 30. It is an undisputed fact that this Defendant and Miller have openly, and repeatedly stated / ad- mitted to the Plaintiff during recent telephone communication, that both Miller and this Defendant, consider the court order of November 7th, 2005 to be AN ABSOLUTE NULLITY, and that both this Defendant and Miller are proceeding as if it is such, citing as their grounds for so doing, the wholly fal- 10 lacious reasoning that the mere fact that Robert Stumpf has moved to New York during the period of PAGE 23 OF 41 time since the order was issued, therefore renders the Order ineffectual, hence, as one no longer having force and effect whatsoever, and,... 31. It is an undisputed fact that by and through the perpetration of all of the wrongs and abuses set forth herein, it is the intention of this Defendant and Miller, to commit acts of blood boiling antagonism against the Plaintiff, for the purpose of Taxing the Plaintiff To His Limits, and ultimately, to cause the Plaintiff to abandon all hope of being able to exercise his Parental Rights to Temporary Custody of Ra- chel, and/or, telephone or written communication with Rachel, and to finally drive the Plaintiff to ac- cept defeat and to become so demoralized, that he would give up his attempts altogether, however, the Plaintiff submits, that if justice is to prevail in this matter, this strategy undertaken by this Defendant and Miller, must necessarily fail. 32. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that on Thursday May 17th, 2007 at approximately 7:38 PM, the Plaintiff initiated phone contact with this Defendant and the Plaintiff ex- pressed his desire to exercise his Parental Right to Temporary Custody of Rachel pursuant to the terms ID and conditions of the existing custody order, on Sunday, May 20th, 2007, and that this Defendant, during the above-referenced telephone conversation, facetiously assured the Plaintiff that this De- fendant would be present, accompanied by Rachel, at the exchange location on May 20th, 2007, however this Defendant, on May 20th, 2007, committed the vexatious, and premeditated act of not appearing at the exchange location with Rachel, thereby causing the Plaintiff to expend time, en- ergy, and his severely limited financial resources, in order to travel from his home in New York to Pennslyvania, and,... 32-A. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that on Friday May 25th, 2007, at approximately 7:35 PM, the Plaintiff initiated phone contact with this Defendant, and was informed by this Defendant, inter alia, that it was the position of the Defendant, that the Plaintiff could perhaps have contact with Rachel after she turns 18 years of age, indicating that this Defendant would do nothing to facilitate contact between Rachel and the Plaintiff, and,... 32-B. Pursuant to the foregoing averment and averment sub-part, it is an undisputed fact that in the Conciliation Conference Summary Report by Hubert X Gilroy, dated February 22nd, 2006, at item # 3, PAGE 24 OF 41 ( Attached as Exhibit E ), it is set forth that this Defendant has admitted that she habitually fails to ap- pear at the exchange location with Rachel pursuant to the terms and conditions of the order, and,... 32-C. Pursuant to the foregoing averments, the Plaintiff presents this averment sub-part in Cartoon Form in the following Two Pages, as follows: The court order is a Nullity Robert,... it's no good because you have moved to New York,... by moving to N.Y., you have surrendered any Parental Rights that you may otherwise have had, t Pursuant to the order,... / Why don't you just sign a legal document granting ME Sole Legal Custody of Rachel,... THEN, and ONLY THEN, will I even consider allowing you to see Rachel. How stupid do you think I am?!? I know you won't come to the exchange fyexpensive, ocation with Rachel! I know that you're just ng to entice me into making yet another long, and fruitless trip from N.Y., to Pa.! All I want is to see my Daughter!,... ave not seen her since December 24th, 2006! How long must I be tortured and denied my Parental Rights \ pursuant to the terms and conditions of the existing custody order?!? Page 25 of 41 1 / However, I will allow you to see Rachel this Sunday. (May 20th, 2007 ) I'll be at the exchange location ,, with Rachel, at 1 PM. , ---?'' You may be right Robert,.... perhaps I won't show up at the exchange location with Rachel,....perhaps you will, once again, have made the long trip to Pa. without getting to see Rachel,..... but what alternative do you really have?? It's a slim chance you'll be able to see Rachel,... But it's the only chance you have, especially since I have absconded with Rachel, and YOU don't even know where she's living currently!,.... HaHa! C *ft We both know, due primarily to our personal experiences in the court over the course of the last several years, that there is ABSOLUTELY NO REMEDY for you in the courts. As we have seen,....the judge of the court just talks tough, and makes threats of enforcement action against me,.... but each time we appear in the court, the judge ultimately continues to allow me to ignore the existing custody order, hence, the judge allows me to continue to abuse you to no end %%.I-_ and with complete impunity 7 [7 Good Grief!!,.. ..It's 1 PM on May 20th, 2007!!,... And Pamela is not at the exchange location with Rachel!,.. Once again, I have been Duped!,.... Once again, I have been caused to travel a great distance, and to expend a large amount of my expendable income, and to exert enormous energy, in hopes of seeing my Daughter Rachel,.....only to be foiled again by this incredibly cruel, heartless, and malicious Defendant! Q Over --; Page 26 of 4 How long must I have to patiently endure all of the vexations caused to me by this Defendant And her agent Jeff Miller? Every day I am denied my Parental Rights, is another day that this Defendant will continue to demonize me, and poison Rachel's mind against me, completely unchallenged! I deserve an opportunity to re-establish the loving, Father- Daughter Relationship I once had with Rachel. That is what is in Rachel's Best Interests!! / Q O 0 6 As long as I am left to my own devices,.....you will NEVER see or speak to Rachel,..... EVER!! When you attempt to telephone Rachel, you will only be able to speak to Jeff Miller, who will do his best to trouble your mind and your feelings, and THAT is how we will proceed, unless and until, you just give up trying all together. I don't care what any court order says Robert!,.... \ "THIS" is how "I" am telling "YOU", how things are going to be! S? PAGE 27 OF 41 1. It is an undisputed fact that this Defendant and Miller have persistently perpetrated acts consti- tuting Abuse against Rachel, other than those which are set forth above, which can rightly be said to be consistent with the definition of the term "Abuse", as it is set forth in Title 23, Pa.C.S. Chapter 61, Section 6102, specifically, that the acts of this Defendant and Miller have caused Rachel reasonable fear of imminent serious bodily injury to both herself, and also to the Plaintiff, the details of which, are set forth in the following statements of undisputed fact, formulated as numbered averments, to wit: 2. It is an undisputed fact that the above-referenced, and below listed acts of this Defendant and Miller have had the effect of seriously troubling the mind and feelings of both Rachel and the Plaintiff, and,... 3. It is an undisputed fact that Miller, on at least one occasion, has demanded that Rachel complete several strenuous household tasks and in consecutive order, under fear, coercion and intimidation of Miller, while simultaneously, Miller had set forth an unreasonable period of time for Rachel to complete these tasks, and,... 4. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that upon Rachel being unable to complete the above-referenced household tasks, Miller, perpetrated an act of abuse calculated in ad- vance, to cause Rachel to experience fear of imminent bodily injury, as well as to trouble Rachel's thoughts and feelings, by Miller proceeding to violently destroying Rachel's property while demanding that the child watch him do it, in particular, property which was known by Miller to have been given to Rachel as a gift, by the Plaintiff, ( inter alia, A Hair Straightener ), and,... 5. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that Miller, citing Rachel's inability to complete the above-referenced household tasks within the time which Miller had allotted for Rachel to do so, has also deprived Rachel of numerous other items of Rachel's property, which were known by Miller to have been given to Rachel by the Plaintiff, including several Audio CD's and other property, and furthermore, the Plaintiff submits that the above-referenced acts of abuse and mental cruelty by Miller, is typical of the abuse suffered by Rachel on a regular and continuing basis, at the hands of r Miller, and,... PAGE 28 OF 41 6. It is an undisputed fact that Miller, on at least one occasion, has BEATEN Robert Jr., by slam- ming him to the ground and proceeding to kick Robert Jr. while Robert Jr. was on the ground, causing injury to Robert Jr., and that this beating was witnessed by Rachel, thus placing Rachel in imminent fear of serious bodily injury, and,... 7. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that the above-referenced incident stemmed from the fact that Miller, by and through his numerous acts of coercion and intimidation against Robert Jr., demanded that Robert Jr. commit criminal acts, specifically, the crimes of Criminal Trespass, and Theft, and that Miller supervised Robert Jr. in the perpetration these crimes, specifically, by demanding that Robert Jr. illegally enter the dwelling of another, and by demand- ing that Robert Jr. remove certain property from said dwelling, and that this conduct by Miller too, was witnessed by Rachel, and,... 1p 8. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that Miller, only after learning that the Police had been apprised of the removal of the above-referenced property illegally taken from the above-referenced dwelling, and after examining the stolen property and evaluating its potential worth, decided it was not worth the risk of legal liability which might attach to the act of taking and/or, being in possession of the stolen property, and so, Miller then demanded that Robert Jr., Re-Enter the dwell- ing to put the property back into the Shack, and,... 9. It is an undisputed fact that Robert Jr. objected to Miller's demand to put the property back into the Shack from which it was taken, and as a direct result of Robert Jr.'s refusal to comply with the de- mands of Miller, Robert Jr. was attacked by Miller and suffered the above-referenced beating which caused injury to Robert Jr., and that Rachel, having witnessed the beating, was caused to experience im- minent fear of serious bodily injury, and terror, and,... 10. It is an undisputed fact that this Defendant is fully aware of the above-referenced incidents, and 10 that this Defendant has taken no action to protect the children from the destructive, dangerous, anti- social conduct, and criminal influences exerted upon the children by Miller, and,... PAGE 29 OF 41 It. It is an undisputed fact that Miller has on numerous occasions, during numerous incidents / nu- merous separate occurrences, operated this Defendant's vehicle, ( A Ford F-150 Pickup Truck ), in a manner intended to harass, menace and terrorize the Plaintiff while the Plaintiff traveled in his vehicle, ( A Nissan Sentra ), on the public roads and by-ways, while Rachel was a passenger in this Defendant's vehicle, thereby placing Rachel in fear of imminent serious bodily injury to both herself, and to the Plaintiff, and,... 12. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that several of the above-referenced incidents have taken place at the custody exchange locations, subsequent to custody exchanges, and that several of these incidents were witnessed by this Defendant, who took no action to prevent, or discour- age Miller from misusing this Defendants property ( the vehicle ), and/or, from perpetrating his criminal acts of harassment and menacing against the Plaintiff, and Rachel, and/or, to prevent, or discourage Miller from uttering foul, abusive, and wholly inappropriate language typically uttered by Miller during these incidents, in the presence of both children, and,... 13. It is an undisputed fact that Miller has, on numerous occasions, openly, and completely without the slightest exercise of any degree of discretion whatsoever, promulgated his intentions to cause serious bodily injury to the Plaintiff, and that these threats were on numerous occasions clearly audible to Ra- chel, causing Rachel to experience, on a regular and continuing basis, fear and anxiety that the Plaintiff would be seriously harmed by Miller, thereby causing great detriment to Rachel's mental, emotional, and physical development, and well being, which has manifested itself, inter alia, in the steady deterio- ration of Rachel's emotional well being, as well as her academic performance, and,... 14. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that among the above-referenced threats by Miller, against the physical well-being of the Plaintiff, which were clearly audible to Rachel, include, but are by no means limited to the following threats: A. "I'm going to get 3 Black Guys from the City, to Pistol Whip him." ( meaning the Plaintiff ) B. "I'm going to Bust his Head Open." (his = The Plaintiff ) PAGE 30 OF 41 15. It is an undisputed fact that Rachel is prohibited, hence, absolutely forbidden, under compulsion of threats of physical violence against her by this Defendant and Miller, from placing local calls to the Plaintiff's cell phone, by using this Defendant's home telephone to do so, and from communicating with the Plaintiff via E-Mail / Computer Generated Messages, and,... 16. It is an undisputed fact, that this Defendant and Miller, have, by their numerous acts of fear and intimidation against Rachel, presumably due to an incident on the School Bus for which Rachel was blamed, inflicted cruel and unusual punishment on Rachel, by demanding that Rachel ride an improp- erly sized bicycle, ( too small ), several miles to school and back, during the winter of 2006, while Miller drove this Defendant's vehicle along side of Rachel, menacing Rachel all the way to and from school. Furthermore, Miller forced the child to make the above-referenced trip in the freezing rain, and forbid Rachel to wear proper clothing, and/or, gloves, which resulted in Rachel having to suffer through the entire school day in soaking wet clothing, and,... 0 17. It is an undisputed fact, that this Defendant and Miller have persistently uttered statements in- tended to trouble the mind and feelings of Rachel, as well as to alienate Rachel's affections for her Fa- ther, such as: A. "Enjoy yourself because this is the last time your ever going to see your father." B. "Your Father doesn't want to see you anymore, he does not love or even care about you." C. "Your Father has moved to New York because he has completely abandoned you." 18. It is an undisputed fact that subsequent to several periods of temporary custody, during which the Plaintiff purchased items of clothing as gifts for Rachel at a local shopping mall, this Defendant and Miller have destroyed those items of clothing which the Plaintiff had purchased for Rachel, upon Ra- chel's return to this Defendant's residence, further to this point, all items of Rachel's property which have been destroyed by this Defendant and Miller, as a method of punishing Rachel, have been exclu- 0 sively confined to items of property which were purchased for Rachel by the Plaintiff, and,... PAGE 31 OF 41 19. It is an undisputed fact that the Plaintiff recently visited the school formerly attended by Rachel, and met with the principle, who informed the Plaintiff that Rachel was failing Gym Class, primarily for her refusal to change into the required gym clothes, furthermore, the Plaintiff submits that the reason for Rachel's refusal to do so, is due to commands given by this Defendant and Miller for Rachel to re- frain from any act/s, which may reveal to school officials, signs of the physical abuse inflicted by this Defendant and Miller, which Rachel is subjected to on a regular and continuing basis, and,... 20. It is an undisputed fact that this Defendant and Miller are both heavy and habitual consumers of Alcoholic Beverages, with this Defendant having no less than FOUR Driving While Intoxicated Of- fenses ( D.W.I. ), to her credit, thus, this behavior by this Defendant and Miller, routinely places Rachel at risk of frequent, inadequate adult supervision / guardianship, and that this Defendant and Miller, by engaging in the frequent and excessive consumption of Alcoholic Beverages, provide a destructive ex- ample for Rachel to follow, as well as an influence upon Rachel which is detrimental to Rachel's men- tal, physical, and emotional development, and,. .. or 20 - A. It is an undisputed fact that in April of 2002, this Defendant was arrested for DWI, and offered "30-day Work Release", during which time she was discovered to have been drinking by her Parole Of- ficer, and was re-arrested and sentenced to 30 days detention, thus providing further example of this Defendant's recalcitrant disregard for the authority of the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in general, and the Orders of the Courts of the State in particular, and,... 20 - B. It is an undisputed fact that this Defendant and Miller are both heavy and habitual users of To- bacco Products, and that this Defendant's dwelling is improperly ventilated, and is lacking in any ade- quate air purification system, and that the inside air of this Defendant's dwelling is continuously, and indiscriminately contaminated with the carcinogenic, toxic, highly addictive, and extremely hazardous fallout from this Defendant and Miller's irresponsible use of tobacco products, and,... 20 - C. It is an undisputed fact that the Plaintiff has been informed by this Defendant, that Miller, on a regular and continuing basis, smokes Marijuana and Crack Cocaine, and possibly other illegal drugs, M and that Miller, with wanton, and reckless disregard for Rachel's best interests, routinely clouds the in- PAGE 32 OF 41 side air of this Defendant's dwelling with extremely harmful chemical agents and other toxins and highly addictive substances to which the other inhabitants of the dwelling are also, routinely exposed, and,... 21. It is an undisputed fact that Miller has, on numerous occasions, violently, forcibly yanked the phone wire, thus causing the phone wire connector to separate from the phone outlet on the phone jack, simultaneous to the Plaintiff phoning the dwelling of this Defendant, which resulted in troubling the mind and feelings of Rachel, and,... 22. It is an undisputed fact, that Miller has instructed the children that the correct way to reprimand the family dog when it happens to misbehave, is to strike the animal with a Baseball Bat, and that Robert Jr. has, on more than one occasion, followed this advice, thus, causing Rachel to experience the terror and horror of the suffering inflicted upon the dog,... F. Acts of this Defendant and Miller Causing or Attempting to Cause, the Alienation of Rachel's Affections for the Plaintiff., 1. It is an undisputed fact, that in addition to the preceding averments which may be construed as having the effect of Alienating Rachel's Affections from the Plaintiff, there have been numerous other acts committed by this Defendant and Miller, specifically intended to have this effect, and,... 2. It is an undisputed fact that on several occasions, the Plaintiff has phoned this Defendants resi- dence in keeping with the terms and conditions of the Order, and has spoken with individuals, presuma- bly female, who identified themselves only as "Baby-Sitters", and that the Plaintiff was informed by these "Baby-Sitters", that this Defendant and Miller had informed them that the Plaintiff was, quote, "Dead to Rachel", end quote, and "That the Plaintiff was not to be allowed to speak with Rachel no matter the circumstances.", and,... 3. Pursuant to the foregoing averment, it is an undisputed fact that this Defendant and Miller have provided detailed instructions to these "Baby-Sitters", to interfere with the Order of the Court, and that PAGE 33 OF 41 these instructions were known to Rachel, and,... 4. It is an undisputed fact that this Defendant and Miller have persistently engaged in offensive, abusive, vulgar speech intended to negatively impact and/or, alienate the children's affections from the Plaintiff, and that by so doing, this Defendant and Miller have created a Semantic Environment which has negatively impacted the manner in which Rachel is permitted to speak, and/or, think, and/or, per- ceive, and/or, convey her feelings / emotions, concerning the Plaintiff, and,... 5. It is an undisputed fact that this Defendant has a history of withdrawing Rachel from activities which might offer the Plaintiff an opportunity to attend as a spectator, with the intention of causing ir- reparable harm and injury to both the Plaintiff and Rachel, as well as to trouble the mind and feelings of the Plaintiff and Rachel, for instance, activities such as Cheerleading, and Gymnastics, and,.... 6. It is an undisputed fact that Miller has a history of promulgating false information about the Plaintiff to individuals in the community, for the intended purpose of causing damage to the Plaintiff's reputation and standing in the community, and also to maliciously debase and devalue the Plaintiff in the minds of others, ( i.e., Pastor Gregory Heiman and Mrs. Heiman ), and that this behavior has been displayed without discretion, and in a manner which it was made clearly known to Rachel, and,... G. Prayer for Relief., WHEREFORE, founded upon the record of the instant matter, and also upon of all of the foregoing statements of undisputed facts herein contained, the Plaintiff hereby sets forth his requests and sugges- tions to the above-named court as follows: 1. The Plaintiff hereby respectfully requests that the above-named court find that sufficient probable cause exists for the granting the Plaintiffs request for the issuance of a warrant for arrest of Miller, forthwith and in advance of any hearing in connection with this matter, upon reasonable suspicion that Miller has committed the felony crime of Rape against Rachel Stumpf, as the term Rape is defined in Title 18, Pa. C.S., Chapter 31 (b), Section 3121, See: United States v. Harris, 403 PAGE 34 OF 41 0 U.S. 573 (1971), and,... 2. The Plaintiff hereby respectfully requests that the above-named court grant the Plaintiffs request for the entering of an order (1) prohibiting Miller from being in control and/or possession of a firearm, other weapon, ammunition, and any firearm license, and (2) requiring that Miller relin- quish any firearm, other weapon, ammunition and any firearm license currently in his control or possession, to the sheriff of this county, and (3) prohibiting Miller from transferring, acquiring, or possessing a firearm, other weapon, ammunition, or any firearm license for the duration of the or- der, forthwith and in advance of any hearing in connection with this matter, and,... 3. The Plaintiff hereby respectfully requests that the above-named court grant the Plaintiffs request for the entering of an order of the court for Rachel to be examined by competent medical professionals, and that a comprehensive physical and psychological evaluation of Rachel be con- ducted for the purpose of (1) ascertaining, specifically, the specific severity and extent of the abuse committed against Rachel by Miller, and also (2) for the purpose of determining the criminal charge/s upon which Miller is to be prosecuted, forthwith and in advance of any hearing in connec- tion with this matter, and,... 4. The Plaintiff hereby respectfully requests that the above-named court grant the Plaintiffs request for the entering of a Protective Order, inter alia, prohibiting any and all contact between Ra- chel and Miller, and prohibiting Miller from being present at any and all places where Rachel may reasonably be known to frequently be, forthwith, and in advance of any hearing on this matter, and,... 5. The Plaintiff hereby respectfully requests that the above-named court grant the Plaintiffs request for the entering of an order, superceding any prior order relating to child custody entered in this matter, awarding the Plaintiff Immediate, Emergency Temporary Physical Custody of Rachel, hence requiring Rachel be removed from the residence of this Defendant forthwith, and in advance of a hearing on this matter, and for an order setting forth that the local law enforcement agency in the jurisdiction where Rachel is located, shall ensure that the child is placed in the care and control of the Plaintiff forthwith, and in accordance with the terms and conditions of the superceding order, PAGE 35 OF 41 and that this order will remain in full force and effect until a hearing can be conducted, and a modi- fied custody order entered, and with the following restrictions on contact between this Defendant and Rachel to be enforced, to wit: A. This Defendant can phone the Plaintiffs residence and/or the Plaintiffs cellular phone, on ANY DAY between the hours of 10 AM, and 10 PM, in order to enjoy telephone contact with Rachel, and/or, to schedule with the Plaintiff periods of unsupervised temporary custody of Rachel on Any Day, but not to exceed ONE DAY Per any Seven Day Period, and for a period of time not to exceed 8 consecutive hours in duration, with the custody exchanges to take place near the main entrance of the K-Mart store located on the Montauk Highway in the town of Babylon, New York, and,... B. This Defendant shall be restrained from traveling to the exchange location ( to be deter- mined), accompanied by Miller, and/or, from facilitating any contact whatsoever between Rachel and Miller, and,... C. That this Defendant will be prohl 'bt 'ted from possessing, controlling, transferring, or acquir- ing any firearm, other weapon, ammunition, or any firearm license for the duration of this order and that this Defendant shall relinquish any firearm, other weapon, ammunition, and/or, any firearm li- cense in this Defendant's control or possession to the sheriff of this county for the duration of this order, and,... D. That this Defendant will be prohibited from engaging in abusive speech, foul and/or offen- sive, and/or, derogatory language directed towards either Rachel or the Plaintiff, in the course of her communications with either Rachel or the Plaintiff, and,... E. That violation of any of the foregoing restrictions will result in the immediate termination of this Defendant's Parental Rights pursuant to the terms and conditions of the superceding temporary custody order, and,... ID 6. The Plaintiff hereby respectfully requests that the above-named Court find the Defendant in PAGE 36 OF 41 Contempt, and enter the appropriate penalty pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. Section 4346, including a term of imprisonment of six months, and a fine of $1000, and probation for up to six months, and,... 7. The Plaintiff hereby respectfully requests that the above-named court grant the Plaintiff's request for the entering of an order terminating financial support payments from the Plaintiff to this Defendantforth with, and,... Furthermore, the Plaintiff respectfully requests that the above-named court take judicial notice of the Plaintiff's following statements, requests and suggestions, to wit: A. That significant changes in the circumstances exist, which place Rachel in danger of immediate and irreparable injury, as well as further acts of mental and physical abuse at the hands of this Defen- dant and her agent Miller, and that Rachel will suffer irreparable harm if she is to remain in the custody of this Defendant, and,... 10 B. That the Plaintiff has been persistently deprived of his Parental Rights pursuant to the terms and conditions of the various orders of the above-named court by the persistent, willful, knowing, mali- cious, and recalcitrant acts of Non-Compliance of this Defendant, and,... C. That numerous findings of the above-named court, of this Defendant in Contempt, and the courts issuance of numerous, redundant warnings of enforcement action against this Defendant have had little effect, if any, upon the behavior of this Defendant, therefore, this Defendant has been able to enjoy absolute immunity for all the wrongs that she has caused to, and committed against the Plaintiff, and,... D. That the Plaintiff, over the course of several years time, and despite the Plaintiff's persistent ef- forts to bring numerous petitions for redress of his grievances before the above-named court, has been caused by this Defendant to suffer repeated and persistent injury, and that the Plaintiff, to date, has 10 been caused to remain completely without any effective remedy whatsoever, by and through the above- named court's tacit approval of this Defendant's atrocious conduct, and,... PAGE 37 OF 41 E. That the Plaintiff, to date, has patiently and non-violently, endured all of the unbearable suffer- ing inflicted upon him by this Defendant and her agent Miller, and,... F. That the Plaintiff submits that he is rightly deserving of a remedy under the law which will en- able him to repair, resume, and restore, the once warm and loving Father / Daughter relationship of which he has for so long, been deprived by this Defendant and her agent Miller, and,... G. That the Plaintiff has established sufficient grounds for the granting of extraordinary relief, since all efforts of the above-named court to apply ordinary remedies in this matter, have failed misera- bly to bring the Plaintiff relief, therefore making the Plaintiff s request for the above-named court to ap- ply extraordinary measures, all the more fair, just, and reasonable, and,... H. That based upon the factual allegations set forth in these pleadings, and also upon the accumula- 10 tive record of this matter, ( i. e., as many as FIVE Findings of this Defendant to be in Contempt), any remedy which does not include the entering of an order of the above-named court for the removal of Rachel Stumpf from the Primary Physical Custody of this Defendant, and granting the Plaintiffs re- quest for Primary Physical Custody of Rachel, will only be the equivalent of the above-named court granting this Defendant further latitude and/or permission, to not comply with the existing custody or- der, and/or, to continue to ignore the terms and conditions set forth in the existing custody order, and/ or, to circumvent her legal obligations pursuant to the order, and for this Defendant and her agent Miller, to continue to indiscriminately, and persistently violate the orders of the court, and to continue to deprive the Plaintiff of his Parental Rights pursuant to the Order, and,.... 1. That the Plaintiff, since the time of his completion of the Alcohol Rehabilitation Program at Trinity House, has refrained completely from the consumption of (1) alcoholic beverages, and, (2) ille- gal drugs, and, (3) tobacco products, hence, the Plaintiff's home is an alcohol, drug, and tobacco-free environment, which is by far, less likely to cause detriment to either the immediate, or long term health and well-being, and mental, physical and emotional development of Rachel, than might her current en- vironment, and,... PAGE 38 OF 41 J. That if awarded custody of Rachel, that I, Robert Stumpf, will neither: 1 . Introduce any Non-Marital, Live-In, Sexual Relationship into Rachel's home environment whatsoever, or expose the child to any other Relationship with any outside party which may have the effect of confusing, and/or, causing discomfort, danger, or embarrassment, to Rachel, and,... 2. Commit any intentional, and/or, malicious, and/or, retaliatory act/s which may be construed as interfering with, and/or, obstructing any order of this court regarding this Defendant's court ordered periods of temporary custody, and/or, telephone communication, and/or, written correspondence be- tween this Defendant and Rachel, or to commit any act the intended purpose of which is to cause a vexation upon the spirit, and/or, to tax the financial, and/or, emotional resources of this Defendant, nor will the Plaintiff commit any act which is in violation of any other provision, term or condition set forth in any order of this court, and nor will the Plaintiff permit any other person to commit any act in the nature of those described above, and,... 3. Commit any act which might be construed as being intended to undermine the Non-Custodial Parent's relationship with Rachel, and/or, to Alienate Rachel's Affections for this Defendant, to in- clude derogatory speech, and/or, the destruction of any item of Rachel's property received as gifts from the Defendant, and,... K. That any remedy which does not include the entering of an order of the above-named court, for Rachel to be removed from the Primary Physical Custody of this Defendant, and granting the Plain- tiff's request for Primary Physical Custody of Rachel, is certain to bring further injury and vexation to the Plaintiff, hence, further litigation before this court, and/or higher courts of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, hence, additional taxation upon the governmental resources of the above-named Court, and by extension, the Commonwealth itself, and,... L. That this Defendant has proven to be a habitual offender who is not discouraged in the least by the authority of the court, and who has been repeatedly found in contempt by this court, for her recalci- PAGE 39 OF 41 trant acts of non-compliance with the Orders of the Court, and furthermore, this Defendant has acted in a manner which has caused the Plaintiff to Petition the court many times in recent years, seeking re- dress / remedy, hitherto, to no avail, and,... M. That further to the issue raised in the foregoing averment sub-part, it is an undisputed fact that it is a well established maxim of law that, "As transgression is multiplied, the infliction of punishment should increase." - Coke on Magna Charta and Old Acts, 470 and,... N. That, "Remedies are the Life of Rights." - Campbell V. Molt, 115 F.S. 620, and that, "The Law wills that in every case where a man is wronged and endamaged, he shall always have the a rem- edy." Branches Prbcipia Leo et Eguitatis, and that, "To take away an remedy for the enforcement of a right is to take away the right itself." Virginia Coupon Cases, 114 F.S. 270, 303, and.... 0. That the Plaintiff is the party who is far more likely to encourage and permit frequent and con- tinuing contact between Rachel and this Defendant, should the court decide that such contact is in Ra- chel's best interest, and,... P. That there is a long-standing tradition of awarding a change of custody where the Custodial Par- ent, has incessantly interfered with the Parental Rights of the Non Custodial Parent, and that The Court of Appeals of Maryland clearly established this point in Berlin v. Berlin, 239 Md. 52, 210 A.2d 380 (1965), holding that "where a Custodial Parent has attempted to create emotional distance between the Child and the Non-Custodial Parent, that parent has committed an act so egregious that the Non-Custodial Parent could be awarded custody based solely upon this one fact", See also, Walden v Walden, 112 A.D.2d 1035, 492 N.Y.S.2d 827 (1987), and,... Q. That pursuant to Gentry v. Simmons, 754 S.W.2d 579 (Mo. Ct.App. 1988 ), where the Custodial Parent frustrated the Non-Custodial Parents Right to periods of Temporary Physical Custody, and inter- fered with telephone communication between the Non-Custodial Parent and the Child, the court held that "these facts constituted a condition sufficient to form the basis for a modification of the custody order awarding the Non-Custodial Parent Primary Physical Custody of the Child",, See also Eather- PAGE 40 OF 41 P ton v Eatherton, 725 S.W.2d 125, 128 (Mo. [Ct.] App. (1971), and,... R. That other notable cases where custody order was transferred from the Custodial Parent to the Non-Custodial Parent, due to the Custodial Parents acts of interference with the custody order, and/or, verbal abuse, and/or, alienation of the child's affections for the Non-Custodial Parent, include, but are by no means limited to the following; Cornell v. Cornell, 809 S.W. 2d 869 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991 ); Young v. Young, 212 A.D.2d 114, 628 N.Y.S.2d 957 ( 1995 ); Sul- livan v. Sullivan, 216 A.D.2d 627, N.Y.S.2d 829 ( 1995 ); Betancourt v Boughton, 204 A.D. 2d. 804, 611 N.Y.S.2d 941 ( 1994 ); Jeschke v Wockenfuss, 534 N.W.2d 602 ( S.D. 1995 ); Sigg v Sig, 905 P.2d 908 ( Utah Ct.App. 1995 ), and,... S. That the court in Ready v. Ready, 906 P.2d 382 ( Wyo. 1995 ), stated that "I will simply acknowledge on the bench that there is no way I can get the mother to obey the orders of this court in extending visitation privileges to the father, and I am going to transfer custody as of today to the father. ", and that the court also held that the mothers incessant denial of visitation was an injury to the children, and that it would be improper to leave the children in the custody of the party who caused those injuries, and,... T. That courts across this nation have held that a parents interference with the other parents court ordered periods of temporary physical custody of a child, was deemed to be a question of the interfering parents fitness to have custody, and that among those cases, are the following; Young v. Young, 212 A.D.2d 114, 628 N.Y.S.2d 957 ( 1995 ); Maloney v. Maloney, 208 A. D.2d 603 N.Y.S.2d 190, 191 ( 1994 ), and,... U. That the Plaintiff respectfully suggests that the Judge of the above-named court conduct an interview of Rachel in his Chambers to determine the truthfulness of the Plaintiffs state- ments about this Defendant and Miller's conduct, in particular, the acts of criminality com- plained of herein, and their acts of obstruction / interference with the orders of the court specifi- cally, regarding Temporary Custody, and telephone and written communication. PAGE 41 OF 41 Submitted with all due respect, this day of c 2007. Robert C. Stumpf, 1130 America Ave, West Babylon, NY 11703 Under penalty of perjury, I declare that I have read the text of this document and have personal knowledge of the facts and matters therein set forth and averred and that each and all of these facts and matters stated in it are absolutely true and correct. SWORN TO and subscribed before me this day of 2007. Terrianne ftftry pub0Nc, State Nw N, York o. "?Pl?ppg ? In $u NOTARY PUBLICc My Commission Expires: /Ubb BY: ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. : NO. 03-160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN CUSTODY Defendant Pre-Hearing Memorandum of Plaintiff AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Robert C. Stumpf, (hereinafter referred to as "Father") by and through his attorney, Jessica Holst, Esquire, of MidPenn Legal Services, and files the following Pre-Trial Memorandum: Fact Witnesses: Robert Stumpf - Father will testify to the problems he has encountered since the entry of the November 7, 2005, Order regarding partial physical custody of Rachel Stumpf. Father will explain how these problems have been existed since the entry of the November 7ch Order, but also to the fact that they are essentially the same problems that have brought us before the Court three (3) times in the past year. He will testify to his attempts to see Rachel according to the custody schedule and the actions by Mother and her boyfriend (hereinafter referred to as "Boyfriend") that have prevented him from exercising his custodial periods. Father will also testify to the ongoing problems regarding telephone contact with Rachel. Finally, Father will testify to the importance of having a relationship with Rachel and why, despite the pervasive problems instigated by Mother and Boyfriend, Father can be a positive parental figure. Jim Cutaiar - Mr. Cutaiar is Father's friend who has accompanied Father to Walmart for custody exchanges. Mr. Cutaiar will testify to the fact that Father arrives at the designated location for the custody exchanges and to the fact that Father arrives early. He will also testify to the events that take place when Father tries to contact Mother from Walmart when Rachel is not there for exchanges. Plaintiff reserves the right to call additional witnesses with prior notice. 2. Expert Witnesses - None 3. History of Custody - The parties signed a Custody Stipulation and Agreement that was entered as an Order of Court on April 2, 2003. That Order, in pertinent part, gave the parties shared legal custody of the children, Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991, and Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 2003. Mother had primary physical custody of the children and Father had periods of partial physical custody at times set forth in the agreement. On December 28, 2004, a new Order modified the existing custody arrangement to give Father periods of partial physical custody every Saturday from 12:00 noon until 5:00 p.m. Father is also entitled to reasonable telephone contact with the children. The parties attended a hearing on March 3, 2005, wherein they reached an agreement that Father would continue with his Saturday visits with Rachel and would begin counseling sessions with Robert in order to address problems they have faced in their relationship. For a brief period of time, Boyfriend left the home and Father was able to spend time with both children, beyond the schedule outlined in the March 3, 2005, Order. By July 2005, Boyfriend returned to the home and Mother returned to the non-compliant behavior exhibited prior to the March 3, 2005, Order. Father filed a Petition for Contempt and Modification based on Mother's refusal to comply with the counseling requirement for Robert and Father, Mother's and Boyfriend's interference with Father's phone contact with Rachel, and Mother's and Boyfriend's behavior during custody exchanges. At the conciliation conference in September 2005, an Interim Order changed the exchange point to Walmart on Rte. 322, required that the parties ensure no negative behavior during exchanges, and scheduled Father's time for telephone contact with the children. Despite this Order, Father's telephone contact has been eliminated by Mother and Boyfriend, and custody exchanges are still rife with confrontation and negativity initiated by Boyfriend and/or the minor son, Robert Stumpf. On November 3, 2005, the parties attended a hearing on Father's Petition for Contempt and Modification. Subsequent to the hearing, this Court entered two Orders. The first Order found Mother in contempt of the March 3, 2005, Order and indicated that contempt could be purged by strict compliance with the November 7, 2005, Order. The second Order was the new custody Order granting the parties shared legal custody of Rachel Stumpf. Mother had primary physical custody of Rachel and Father had periods of partial physical custody every Saturday from 10:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m.; exchanges to occur at the Walmart on Rte. 322. Father was also granted liberal telephone contact with Rachel. Since the entry of an Order on November 7th, Father has continuously been denied visitation with Rachel and has been able to exercise custody on only two (2) occasions. Father is also denied telephone contact with Rachel. Instead, Father is harassed by Mother's boyfriend and Mother does nothing to discourage this behavior. This is the third hearing on contempt issues before this Court since March 2005. Additionally, Mother has provided Father with no information regarding Rachel and consequently, Father cannot exercise his legal custody rights in regard to his daughter. 4. Issues for Resolution: Is Mother in contempt of the November 7, 2006, Order granting Father periods of partial physical custody of Rachel. Suggested Answer: Yes 5. Estimated Length of Trial - Three hours 6. Any Reports from Local Agencies - None 7. Any Reports of Experts Intended to be Called as Witnesses - None Respectfully. Submitted, ssiA Hoist, Esquire MidPenn Legal Services 401 E. Louther Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-9400 ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. NO. 03-160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN CUSTODY Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Jessica Holst, Esquire, of MidPenn Legal Services, attorney for the Plaintiff, Robert C. Stumpf, hereby certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing Pre-Hearing Memorandum on the following date and in the manner indicated below: U.S. First Class Mail, Postage Pre-Paid Pamela O'Brien 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 Date: MidPenn Legal Services, Inc. Jesg'ic#(st, Esquire AdPenn Legal Services 401 E. Louther Street Carlisle, PA 17013 V 1 ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff/Petitioner CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 03-160 CIVIL TERM •-" ?ii-n PAMELA O'BRIEN 711 Defendant/Respondent IN CUSTODY w -: r n PETITION FOR CONTEMPT AND MODIFICATION { Petitioner, Robert C. Stumpf, by and through his counsel, MidPenn Legal 0, Services, states the following: 1. Plaintiff/Petitioner, hereinafter referred to as Father, resides at 1150-A Goodwill Drive, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania 17101. 2. Defendant/Respondent, hereinafter referred to as Defendant, resides at 308 Summit Ridge Drive, Middletown, Dauphin County, PA 17057. 3. The above-named parties are the natural parents of Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991 and Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994. 4. The current Custody Order, attached as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference, is dated November 7, 2005. The Order, in pertinent part, grants Defendant sole legal and physical custody of Robert Stumpf, and grants the parties shared legal custody of Rachel Stumpf. Defendant has primary . physical custody of Rachel, with Father having periods of temporary physical custody every Saturday from 10:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m., and reasonable telephone contact with Rachel when she is with Defendant. 5. Defendant has willfully disobeyed the Order in ways including, but not limited to, the following: a. Refusing to permit Father to exercise his periods of temporary physical custody in accordance with the Order. Since November 7th1", when the current Order went into effect, Father should have had nine (9) visits with Rachel. As summarized below, seven of those visits were compromised or effectively eliminated by Defendant. i . On November 11 `", Defendant tried to unilaterally change the time designated for Father to pick-up Rachel. In addition, ,. Rachel was unwilling to accompany Father to his residence because of threats and intimidation by Defendant and her boyfriend. ii. On November 18`" Father was deceived into believing that Rachel had made plans with a friend that interfered with the ordered custody schedule. Based on this deception, Father relinquished his visit on November 18`" iii. On November 261" Defendant did not bring Rachel to the exchange point. Father was there on time. iv. On December 3'd Defendant did not bring Rachel to the , exchange point. Father was there on time. 0 v. On December 17`h Father declined visitation because he was ill. Father informed his daughter and Defendant. vi. On December 24`h Father was denied a visit with Rachel., Instead, Father received a letter from Robert Stumpf. It was ?r. attached to his car while it was parked at Trinity House. R copy of the letter is attached hereto as "Exhibit B". vii. On December 31", Defendant did not bring Rachel to the exchange point. Father was there on time. viii. On January 7`h, Defendant did not bring Rachel to the exchange point. Father was there on time. b. Failing to allow Father reasonable telephone contact with Rachel. 0 c. Refusing to communicate with Father about the custody schedule. 6. Defendant is not acting in Rachel's best interest for reasons including, but not limited to, the following: a. Defendant and her boyfriend have willfully denied Father partial physical custody of Rachel in ways set forth in Paragraph Five of this Petition for Contempt and Modification. b. This is the third time in the past year that Father has been forced to pursue a contempt action against Defendant. Following a hearing, this Court entered an Order on November 7, 2005, finding Defendant in contempt of the Court's March 3, 2005, Order. I , -101 y I « •wtia . c. Defendant has deliberately and willingly disobeyed the November 7, 2005, Order. d. efenda is actions ins cre.atiri .,such a tense and negative, atrnosphrre;. egarding:eust©dY, causes stress for Rachel and Makes Rachel a vehicle ;fax f as and *them se: c se ffircu;lty, four Father. e Defendant and her boyfriend continually alienate Father which interferes with the appropriate and healthy father/daughter relationship that is imperative to Rachel's ongoing emotional development and D well being. f. Defendant allows, and encourages, her boyfriend's aggressive and immature behavior. Since the most recent Order was entered in November 2005, Defendant has also encouraged Robert Stumpf to display the same negative and hostile behavior demonstrated by, Defendant's boyfriend 'TThis behavior takes:,place in front of Rachel; is.: wtnheathy: and `dangerous to her well-being and interferes with her relationship with Father. g. Defendant's actions interfere with F her's ability to exercise his shared legal custody right to particip e in major decisions regarding Rachel. r 7. Father is entitled to modified periods of partial custody, which is in Rachel's best interest, for reasons including but not limited to the following: a. Father wants to maintain the relationships that he has established with Rachel. This Court has already determined the importance of maintaining a relationship between Father and Rachel and it is imperative that Rachel have regular and ongoing contact with Father for her emotional well being and development. b. Father is able to exercise his periods of partial custody as set forth in the November 7, 2005, order and wishes to have additional time to make up for the time lost as a result of Defendant's failure to comply with the existing Order. The failure to exercise periods of partial custody is the result of Defendant's and Defendant's Boyfriend's interference, not Father's lack of interest or determination to see Rachel. c. Father seeks a custody schedule to address holidays. 8. It is unknown whether Defendant is represented and counsel for Plaintiff is unable to request concurrence for the relief requested in this Petition. WHEREFORE, Father respectfully requests the following: a. That this Court find Defendant in contempt of the existing March 3, 2005, Court Order and enter an appropriate penalty as permitted unde `including imprisonment up to six months, a fine up to $500, probation for up to six months, or an order for nonrenewal, suspension or denial of r operating privileges pursuant to §4355. b. That this matter be scheduled for a dustody conciliation 'W establish terms of a modified custody schedule. c. That Defendant and Father continue to share legal custody of Rachel. d. That Father's periods of partial custody be increased as follows: 1) Every Saturday from 10: 00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. 2) Every other Sunday from 10:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. e. That Father be granted reasonable contact via telephone and written correspondence with Rachel when she is in Defendant's custody, without interference or involvement of Defendant's boyfriend. f. That Defendant's boyfriend be ordered to refrain from any interference or involvement with custody exchanges or telephone conversations between . Father and Rachel. g. What Defendant provide Father with all information relevant to legal custody to which he is entitled such as school information, doctor's visits, etc., in a timely manner. h. Any other relief this Court finds just and proper. Respectful,subrmXf ed, Jess a st, Esquire M. P Legal Services 4 I /East Louther Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-9400 ROBERT C. STUMPF/ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant 03-160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 23rd day of March, 2006, I adjudicate the Defendant in civil contempt. 1. The custody order of November 7, 2005, is amended,.. to delete paragraph 5 and replace it as follows: 2. Father shall have temporary physical custody of Rachel every Sunday from 1:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. 3. All of the provisions of the custody order of November 7, 2005, shall remain in full force and effect. 4. The mother may purge herself of civil contempt by strictly complying with all terms of the order of November 7, 2005, as amended this date. By t 1r6 Jessica 14,z,-Ltz, 'you ; MidPenn Legal Services 401 E. Louther Street Carlisle, PA 17012 For the Plaintiff Pamela O'Brien, Defendant Pro Se 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 pcb I l EX, h;lnef iVZ ll. ceZ . railac?r?nt?r? ROBERT C. STUMPF, : IN TIIE COURT OF COMM Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, P . V. NO. 03-1.60 CIVIL ACTION PAMELA O'BRIEN, IN CUSTODY Defendant . Prior Judge: The Honorable Edgar B. Bayley 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 children who are the subject of this litigation is as follows: • Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991 ` Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994 2. A Conciliation Conference was held on February 17, 2006 with the following individuals in attendance: The Mother, Pamela O'Brien, appeared via telephone conference The Father, Robert C. Stumpf, with his counsel, Jessica Holst, Esquire v 3. The parties were before the Court last November at which time Mother was held in contempt and allowed to purge her contempt if she abided by a new Order entered November 7, 2005. Father now petitions for contempt again, suggesting Mother is not abiding by the Order. At the conciliation conference, Mother suggested that sometimes she appears to deliver custody and the Father is not present, `` `a ._ She IWOM suggests Rachel does not want to go visit the Father. The parties could not reach an agreement and it is clear that there are problems with respect to compliance with the Order. A hearing is required. 0 Date: Februaryo?c? , 2006 N ROBERT C. STUMPF, PLAINTIFF V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, DEFENDANT 03-160 CIVIL TERM : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this z? day of November, 2005, following a hearing on the merits, IT IS ORDERED: (1) All prior custody orders are vacated and replaced with this order. (2) Pamela O'Brien shall have sole legal and physical custody of Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991. (3) Robert C. Stumpf and Pamela O'Brien shall have joint legal custody of Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994. i (4) The mother shall have primary physical custody of Rachel. (5) The father shall have temporary physical custody of Rachel each Saturday from 10:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. (6) Exchanges for such periods of temporary physical custody shall occur at McDonald's at the Wal-Mart on PA Route 322. (7) The father may call Rachel on any day between 7:30 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. If the father calls and Rachel is not present the mother shall have Rachel call the father back when she returns home. By the-Court, In i iinio y wm, horo unto -4 racy N-,io o Jrtd 1110 S of CQU4 at phi,: ,7crv Edgar B. Bayley, J. Rrothenoiarv ca- t (Z;+ C-4 tr? Q? bo 'A Rs- d ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, DEFENDANT 03-160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this day of August, 2007, treating the within document as a petition to hold Pamela O'Brien in contempt of an existing custody order and for special relief, a hearing shall be conducted in Courtroom Number 2, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania at 1:30 p.m., Thursday, August 30, 2007. It is plaintiff's responsibility to have the petition and this order served on defendant. obert C. Stumpf, Pro se 1130 America Ave. ;West abylon, MY 11703 mela O'Brien, Pro se :sal 4 By the >- co r C3'+ ?. a:L IJ ty 1 S- VV Js, aoo3-Do160 r Verification of Receipt for Court Papers Served on Behalf of Robert Stumpf NAME SIGNATURE DATE Person Serving Papers NAME Rev. GMory A. Helman SIGNATURE /Ltl r, . Ct ADDRESS 60 Clemens Drive Dillsburg, PA 17019-1366 p - I2g--d-7 tis i n G-a ._.s ':? ? ? Y??`?' OM & &U2ULAKIS Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire Attorney I.D. #: 86914 36 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-0900 ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA V. NO. 03-160 PAMELA O'BRIEN, CIVIL ACTION-LAW Defendant IN CUSTODY TO THE HONORABLE EDGAR B. BAYLEY, JUDGE OF SAID COURT: MOTION FOR CONTEMPT PETITION TO BE HEARD BY CUSTODY CONCILIATOR PURSUANT TO CUMBERLAND COUNTY LOCAL RULE 1915.12-1 AND NOW, this 28' day of August, 2007, comes the Petitioner, Pamela O'Brien, by and through her attorney, Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire, of ABom & KUTUL.AKiS, L.L.P., and respectfully petitions This Honorable Court to order the Petition for Civil Contempt filed by Robert C. Stumpf to be referred to a conciliator pursuant to Local Rule 1915.12-1, and in support thereof avers the following. 2 1. Plaintiff's Sworn Motion for Immediate Emergency Custody and Contempt, was filed on or about August 8, 2007, by Robert C. Stumpf. 2. On August 8, 2007, This Honorable Court issued an Order directing the Petition, being treated as a petition for contempt and special relief, to be heard on August 30, 2007, at 1:30 PM. 3. Cumberland County Local Rule 1915.12-1 states "all petitions for contempt and/or modification shall be filed in the same manner as original complaints in Rule 1915.3(1) and the Court Administrator shall refer same to the conciliator for review." 4. Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire is the assigned conciliator in this matter. 5. Undersigned counsel respectfully requests that the Petition for Contempt be referred to the conciliator to be scheduled for a conciliation conference, pursuant to Local Rule 1915.12-1. WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays that This Honorable Court grant her Motion and refer the Petition for Contempt to the custody conciliator. Respectfully submitted, DAB oB 12q 0? ABOM & SUTULAKIS, L.L.P. Kara W. Haggerty, E Attorney ID No. 86 36 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-0900 Attorney for Petitioner 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this A 4k day of 2007, I, Kara. W. Haggerty, Esquire, of Abom & Kutulakis, L.L.P, here certify that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing MOTION FOR CONTEMPT PETITION TO BE HEARD BY CUSTODY CONCILIATOR PURSUANT TO CUMBERLAND COUNTY LOCAL RULE 1915.12-1, upon the Defendant by depositing, or causing to be deposited, same in the United States Mail, First-class mail, postage prepaid addressed to the following: Robert C. Stumpf 1130 America Avenue West Babylon, NY 11703 Respectfully submitted, Abom dig 8undakkris, L.L.P. Kara W. Haggerty, e Attorney ID No. 8 36 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-0900 4 r^? p m Y i _ r3+' 3'A ? ` ? OM & N ULAKIS Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire Attorney I.D. #: 86914 36 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-0900 ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA : NO. 03-160 : CIVIL ACTION-LAW : IN CUSTODY TO THE HONORABLE EDGAR B. BAYLEY, JUDGE OF SAID COURT: PETITION FOR CIVIL CONTEMPT FOR DISOBEDIENCE OF CUSTODY ORDER AND MOTION TO MODIFY CUSTODY AND NOW, comes the Petitioner, Pamela O'Brien, by and through her counsel, Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire, of A130m & KUTULAKIS, L.L.P., and respectfully petitions This Honorable Court to hold Respondent, Robert C. Stumpf, in contempt of its Order, and to modify the existing Order of Court for custody, and in support thereof avers the following: COUNT 1: PETITION FOR CIVIL CONTEMPT FOR DISOBEDIENCE OF CUSTODY ORDER 1. On November 7, 2005, and amended on March 23, 2006, This Honorable Court entered an Order awarding the parties shared legal custody and Petitioner primary physical custody of the minor child, Rachel Stumpf, date of birth, June 9, 1994. True and correct copies of the Orders are attached to this Petition. 2. Respondent has willfully failed to abide by the Order referenced above in that Respondent relocated to the state of New York. 3. Respondent has willfully failed to abide by the Order referenced above in that Respondent has not appeared for his regularly scheduled custody time with his daughter on Sundays. 4. Respondent fails to advise Petitioner, in advance of his custody time, whether or not he will be exercising custody on any particular Sunday. 5. Petitioner has regularly and routinely appeared for the custody exchanges, and Respondent fails to appear and fails to notify Petitioner of his intent not to appear. 6. Respondent has willfully failed to abide by the Order referenced above in that Respondent does not exercise his court-ordered telephone contact between 7:30p.m. and 8:00p.m. 7. Respondent has consistently telephoned his daughter's primary residence outside the court-ordered time, usually at times in the middle of the night. 8. It is believed, and therefore averred, Respondent has willfully failed to abide by This Honorable Court's Order directing the Respondent to appear at a specific location on Sundays to exercise custody with his daughter. 9. It is believed, and therefore averred, Respondent has willfully failed to abide by This Honorable Court's Order directing the Respondent to telephone his daughter at specific times. 10. Respondent's willful failure to abide by the custody order is the sole reason Petitioner had to file the within petition. 11. Petitioner is. without financial resources to continue to litigate custody issues due to Respondent's willful failure to abide by This Honorable Court's orders. WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays that this Honorable Court find Respondent in contempt of its Order. Furthermore, Petitioner prays that This Honorable Court direct Respondent to pay the costs and attorney's fees associated with Petitioner bringing this Petition. COUNT 2: MOTION TO MODIFY CUSTODY 12. Paragraphs one (1) through eleven (11) are hereby incorporated by reference. 13. On or about or around November 2006, Father relocated out of Pennsylvania to the State of New York. 14. For at least three (3) months following Father's relocation, Mother appeared every Sunday at the custody exchange location. 15. Father failed to ever appear for a custody exchange after moving to New York. 16. Father failed to notify Mother whether he intended to appear to exercise custody of his daughter after moving to the State of New York. 17. It is believed and therefore averred that it is in the minor child's best interests for Father to be granted partial physical custody on one Sunday of every month from 1:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays that this Honorable Court find Respondent in contempt of its Order. Petitioner prays that this Honorable Court modify the custody order, maintaining Mother as primary physical custodian and granting Father partial physical custody of the subject minor child on one Sunday each month. Furthermore, Petitioner prays that This Honorable Court direct Respondent to pay the costs and attorney's fees associated with Petitioner bringing this Petition. Respectfully submitted, Date 0512-1 b1 ABOM & KUTULA"S, L.L.P. Kara W. Haggerty (? ? ID No. 86914 V` 36 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-0900 Attomey for Petitioner ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, DEFENDANT 03-160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this Z? day of November, 2005, following a hearing on the merits, IT IS ORDERED: (1) All prior custody orders are vacated and replaced with this order. (2) Pamela O'Brien shall have sole legal and physical custody of Robert Stumpf, born February 21, 1991. (3) Robert C. Stumpf and Pamela O'Brien shall have joint legal custody of Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994. (4) The mother shall have primary physical custody of Rachel. (5) The father shall have temporary physical custody of Rachel each Saturday from 10:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. (6) Exchanges for such periods.of temporary physical custody shall occur at McDonald's at the Wal-Mart on PA Route 322. (7) The father may call Rachel on any day between 7:30 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. If the father calls and Rachel is not present the mother shall have Rachel call the father back when she returns home. By the-Court, T?' , . C0:iP' Y F 01161 ii In Tied p r'y WhBr ', i I WO WOO IK4 My hakild end U79 Saw of mw CWJ4 at 1? , ft. thiy'7Z? ??? Edgar B. Bayley, J. Rrofhrsncit?r? ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. CIVIL ACTION - LAW PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant 03-160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 23rd day of March, 2006, I adjudicate the Defendant in civil contempt. 1. The custody order of November 7, 2005, is amended,. to delete paragraph 5 and replace it as follows: 2. Father shall have temporary physical custody of Rachel every Sunday from 1:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. 3. All of the provisions of the custody order of November 7, 2005, shall remain in full force and effect. 4. The mother may purge herself of civil contempt by strictly complying with all terms of the order of November 7, 2005, as amended this date. By t1r& Jessica liti}tz, Ezalu ; O? MidPenn Legal services 401 E. Louther Street Carlisle, PA 17012 For the Plaintiff Pamela O'Brien, Defendant Pro Se 308 Summit Ridge Drive Middletown, PA 17057 pcb r• rl r- f: f ! '.',' art t,n' rothorrn#ary VERIFICATION Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire, states that she is the attorney for the party filing the foregoing document; that she makes this affidavit as an attorney for the Petitioner, because the party she represents for whom she makes this affidavit is outside the jurisdiction of the court, and verification of the Petitioner can not be obtained within the time allowed for the filing of the document; and that she has sufficient knowledge or information and belief, based upon her investigation of the matters averred in the foregoing document; and that this statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification of authorities. DATE06 b Respectfully submitted, ABOM & KUMLMUS, L.L.P Kara W. Haggerty, Es e 36 South Hanover Stre Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-0900 Attorney for Petitioner ID #86914 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 29' day of August, 2007, I, Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire, hereby certify that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing PETITION FOR CIVIL CONTEMPT FOR DISOBEDIENCE OF CUSTODY ORDER AND MOTION TO MODIFY CUSTODY upon the Respondent by depositing, or causing to be deposited, same in the U.S. mail, postage prepaid, at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, addressed as follows: By First-Class Mail and Certified M Robert C. Stumpf 1130 America Avenue West Babylon, NY 11703 Kara W. Haggerty Attorney for Petition i_ e 8 C C.? y y j' < lL3 Q W -n F r - 1, or OM & LITLILAKIS Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire Attorney I.D. #: 86914 36 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-0900 ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA NO. 03-160 CIVIL ACTION-LAW IN CUSTODY ENTRY OF APPEARANCE Please enter my appearance on behalf of the Defendant, Pamela O'Brien, in the above-captioned matter. Respectfully submitted, ABOM & KUTULAKIS, L.L.P. Date: C42610 Kara W. Haggerty, q) 36 South Hanover Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-0900 Attorney ID No. 86914 j/ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this LlJ day of August, 2007, I, Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire of ABOM & KUTULAKIS, LLP, hereby certify that I did serve or cause to be served a true and correct copy of the foregoing ENTRY OF APPEARANCE by First Class U.S. Mail addressed to the following. Robert C. Stumpf, Pray Se 1130 America Avenue West Babylon, NY 11703 Kara W. Haggerty •.?. ' - C a C:-' ?, --? r? , ? -rt . ?? > ? ? n? r? ? ? ? ?? ,?-- -? ^ •\?.e t' C?3 r ? ? ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant AND NOW, this AUG $ 9 2007 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA NO. 03-160 CIVIL ACTION-LAW IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT day of August, 2007, upon consideration of the attached Motion for Contempt Petition to be Heard by Custody Conciliator Pursuant to Cumberland County Local Rule 1915.12-1, it is ORDERED and DECREED that the Motion is GRANTED. The Petition for Contempt shall be heard by custody conciliator, Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire, on the day of , 2007, at m. on the Fourth Floor of the Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. BY THE COURT: Edgar B. Bayley, P .J. Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire Robert C. Stumpf, ProSe 1130 America Avenue, West Babylon, NY 11703' ! ?I?obw .J 9i047 j:s Qam IZ J ? ? .. - r `?;? r- i ? _ c?+ ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, DEFENDANT 03-0160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this ? day of September, 2007, following a hearing on the merits the petition of Robert C. Stumpf to hold Pamela O'Brien in contempt of a custody order, IS DISMISSED.' Robert C. Stumpf, Pro se 1130 America Avenue West Babylon, NY 11703 Kara Haggerty, Esquire For Pamela O'Brien :sal q1d -7/0 -1 I L)- I ' Pursuant to a court order the father was provided periods of visitation with his daughter Rachel on Sundays from 1:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. When the order was entered, he was living in Harrisburg, Dauphin County. He moved to West Babylon, New York, on December 25, 2006. He claims he was denied much of the visitation before he moved and for a short time after he moved. The mother denies the allegations. At this point, the father's move to New York has made it impractical for him to exercise his periods of Sunday visitation. He has filed a petition to modify the order and the mother has filed a petition to modify it, both of which are being sent to conciliation. The alleged contempt of the mother is old and the current order cannot practicably be enforced. The best course is for the parties to pursue a modification. N f U co ? ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, DEFENDANT 03-0160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT rrk-.. AND NOW, this _ day of September, 2007, the court having heard and decided the petition of Robert C. Stumpf to hold Pamela O'Brien in contempt, and the court being unwilling to hear the merits of a change in the custody order on an emergency basis, that part of the father's petition which seeks a change in the custody order related to his daughter Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994, IS REFERRED TO CONCILIATION to be heard together with the mother's current petition to modify the custody order, that has been referred to conciliation. Robert C. Stumpf, Pro se 1130 America Avenue West Babylon, NY 11703 Kara Haggerty, Esquire For Pamela O'Brien By the Edgar B. Bayley, J. ,?,cr? n ,A.Al -4 `'- ay o 7 I :sal cv Y ? f a V5 N ROBERT C. STUMPF IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. PAMELA O'BRIEN DEFENDANT 2003-0160 CIVIL ACTION LAW IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, Wednesday, September 12, 2007 _,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 Friday, October 12, 2007 at 10:30 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. All children age five or older may also be present at the conference. 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. GBro Es A. 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 CAI VIWA-ASNtf--C! EMI 8 3 :Zl WJ E I J3S LOOZ Jlw, ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. : CIVIL ACTION - LAW PAMELA O'BRIEN, NO. 2003-0160 Defendant IN CUSTODY COURT ORDER AND NOW, this ?)0 day of October, 2007, it is ordered and directed as follows: 1. Carol Lindsay is appointed to represent Rachel Stumpf, born June 9, 1994, in connection with the above custody proceedings. Attorney Lindsay shall serve pro Bono. 2. Attorney Lindsay is directed to meet with the minor child after which the conciliator shall schedule another custody conciliation conference. 3. The appointment of Attorney Lindsay shall include her involvement up to and including the custody conciliation conference and her further involvement will be subject to her agreement and additional Order of Court. cc Robert C. Stumpf a W. Haggerty, Esquire col J. Lindsay, Esquire Hubert X. Gilroy, Esquire 4 ? -? .? _- v ti . . ?W ?- w ? f a? . r ' ' ?,.?'. _t' t ' ? Y ? %1 w1 .1 yy^ ?(t..l? ? -?'Ql {?• ?? "`? ROBERT C. STUMPF, PLAINTIFF IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, DEFENDANT 03-160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this '?- day of February, 2008, IT IS ORDERED that a hearing on the within matters pending before the court shall be conducted in Courtroom Number 2, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania at 1:30 p.m., Wednesday, April 30, 2008. /Robert C. Stumpf 1130 America Avenue /West Babylon, NY 11703 ? Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire For Pamela O'Brien ?Carol J. Lindsay, Esquire Court-appointed for Rachel Stumpf sal 0-6F1 FS m?t Lic.L a/.u?os ?i? t c `_ rat ?_ CS C*li LID c- LA- Et CZD Q CJ C-4 ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, DEFENDANT 03-160 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this F day of March, 2008, upon the motion of Robert C. Stumpf for a continuance, the motion IS GRANTED. The hearing scheduled for April 30, 2008, IS CANCELLED. The hearing shall be conducted in Courtroom Number 2, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania on Thursday, June 19, 2008, at 1:30 p.m. By the rt, z -N Edgar B. Bayley, J. Robert C. Stumpf 1130 America Avenue /West Babylon, NY 11703 Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire For Pamela O'Brien Carol J. Lindsay, Esquire Court-appointed for Rachel Stumpf :sal 0,0 F I'" fr)aLtfCL a,a1o8 d ? ?s - .. ?? ? ?? .k --'s ?a ?;: ??, ' ? L`?- " =?. 1yyC1- , (Y? s ::ls ff X1.1.3 - ? ',1 <? Q ? c -•+ Fare' MAR 1 4 2008 _ __ ,._7 R PP..tc 1 B` o ,E s t))1310M & NU ULAKIS Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire Attorney I.D. #: 86914 36 South Hanover Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-0900 ROBERT C. STUMPF, Plaintiff V. PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : 03-160 CIVIL TERM TO THE HONORABLE EDGAR B. BAYLEY, PRESIDENT JUDGE OF SAID COURT: MOTION TO CONTINUE AND NOW, thiQ?tday of 2008, comes the Defendant, Pamela O'Brien, by and through her counsel, Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire, of Abom & Kutulakis, L.L.P., and respectfully moves This Honorable Court to continue the custody hearing, and in support thereof avers the following: 1. Petitioner is Pamela O'Brien, Defendant in the above-captioned custody matter. 2. Respondent is Robert Stumpf, Plaintiff in the above-captioned custody matter. 3. By Order of Court dated March 17, 2008, the hearing on the respective motions to modify custody is scheduled for Thursday, June 19, 2008 at 1:30 p.m. 4. Petitioner, Pamela O'Brien, has mandatory meetings and/or training on June 19 and June 20, 2008 for her employment and is unable to be present for the hearing. 5. Petitioner respectfully requests the hearing be continued to a later date. 6. Undersigned counsel has contacted Robert Stumpf who does not oppose this Motion. WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays this Honorable Court to continue the hearing on the above- captioned matter to a date to be determined by the trial court. Respectfully submitted, ABOM & KUTULAKIS, LLP Date: 2 4wo I- Kara W. Haggerty, 36 South Hanover Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 249-0900 ID #86914 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ' AND NOW, this ? q ' I day of May 2008, I Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire of ABOM & KUTULAKIS, LLP, hereby certify that I did serve or cause to be served a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion to Continue by First Class U.S. Mail addressed to the following: Robert C. Stumpf 1130 America Avenue West Babylon, NY 11703 ?? ? i? J "'.? P\ 1 ?F ' ??._7 ' ..- .. ._._.', f? '? ?, _JJ C "'? 711N 0 S 2008 ROBERT C. STUMPF, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. : 03-160 CIVIL TERM PAMELA O'BRIEN, Defendant ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 1Aday of /11,Q , 2008, upon the Motion of Defendant, Pamela O'Brien, for a continuance, the Motion is GRANTED. The hearing scheduled for June 19, 2008, is CANCELLED. The Hearing is rescheduled for the Qom' day of , 2008, at O o'clock,. M. in Courtroom Number 2 of the Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. BY THE Edgar B. Judge Distribution: bert C. Stumpf, pro se Plaintiff, 1130 America Avenue, West Babylon, NY 11703 Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire, Attorney for Defendant, Pamela O'Brien .Carol J. Lindsay, Court Appointed Counsel for Rachel Stumpf L/rr /o8 ':r © ? ' ? ? `? Q c`? U