Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-2443TIMOTHY J. LEACH, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS PLAINTIFF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 03, o?g41J 4?'J APRIL D. LEACH, DEFENDANT: IN DIVORCE NOTICE TO DEFEND AND CLAIM RIGHTS YOU HAVE BEEN SUED IN COURT. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take prompt action. You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without you and a Decree of Divorce or Annulment may be entered against you by the Court. A judgment may also be entered against you for any other claim or relief requested in these papers by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you, including custody or visitation of your children. When the ground for Divorce is indignities or irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, you may request marriage counseling. A list of marriage counselors is available in the Office of the Prothonotary, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. IF YOU DO NOT FILE A CLAIM FOR ALIMONY, DIVISION OF PROPERTY, LAWYER'S FEES, OR EXPENSES BEFORE A DIVORCE OR ANNULMENT IS GRANTED, YOU MAY LOSE THE RIGHT TO CLAIM ANY OF THEM. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Lawyer Referral Service Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, PA 17013 717-249-3166 or 800-990-9108 (in PA only) TIMOTHY J. LEACH, PLAINTIFF V. APRIL D. LEACH, DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - AW NO. 03 • .,2 V" IN DIVORCE COMPLAINT IN DIVORCE UNDER SECTION 3301(c) OF THE DIVORCE CODE AND NOW comes the above Plaintiff, Timothy J. Leach, by his attorney, William R. Balaban, Esquire, and seeks to obtain a Decree in Divorce from the above-named Defendant, upon the grounds hereinafter set forth: 1. The Plaintiff, Timothy J. Leach, is an adult individual who resides at 2045 Valley Road, Enola, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. The Defendant, April D. Leach, is an adult who resides at 2022 Market Street, Camp Hill, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. The Plaintiff has been a bond fide resident of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for at least six (6) months immediately prior to the filing of this Complaint. 4. The Plaintiff and Defendant were married on June 3, 1995, in Cumberland County, at the Condoquinet Creek, Enola, Pennsylvania. 5. The Plaintiff and Defendant are both citizens of the United States of America. 6. There have been no prior actions in divorce between the parties. 7. The Plaintiff and Defendant are not members of the Armed Services of the United States or any of its allies. Plaintiff has been advised of the availability of counseling and that he may have the right to request that the Court require the parties to participate in counseling. 9. The cause of action and sections of Divorce Code under which Plaintiff is proceeding are: A. Section 3301(c). The marriage of the parties is irretrievably broken. After ninety (90) days have elapsed from the date of the filing of this Complaint, Plaintiff intends to file an Affidavit consenting to a divorce. Plaintiff believes that Defendant may also file such an Affidavit. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff prays your Honorable Court to enter a Decree in Divorce from the bonds of matrimony. Respectfully Submitted, ELLIOTT REIHNER SIEDZIKOWSKI EGAN & BALABAN By: J William R. Balaban, Esquire Attorney I. D. #: 19667 Governors' Row 27 North Front Street P. O. Box 1284 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1284 Attorney for Plaintiff Date: '5- /;t, 3) 0 3 TIMOTHY J. LEACH, PLAINTIFF V. APRIL D. LEACH, DEFENDANT : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. IN DIVORCE COMPLAINT IN DIVORCE UNDER SECTION 3301(c) OF THE DIVORCE CODE I, Timothy J. Leach, verify that the statements made in this Complaint are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C. S. A. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. By: 'm y J. Leach ?? ??' ?\ ?\ ,\ '? i \ ? ?1 ?? ,•r_:r ? Cf? =-?+ - ; -,-- F•; J", ?.? .c C_ rte) ? n ,. _, ?" ?-. `, ?=.? ?' -: ;'ch`i ;? ?? e' -G i.ft Andrew C. Sheely, Esquire 127 S. Market Street P.O. Box 95 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 PA ID NO. 62469 717-697-7050 (Phone) 717-697-7065 (Fax) TIMOTHY J. LEACH, Plaintiff VS. APRIL D. LEACH, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW 03 - 2443 CIVIL TERM IN DIVORCE ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE I, Andrew C. Sheely, Esquire, hereby accept service of the divorce complaint on behalf of April D. Leach , Defendant, and further certify that I am authorized to do so in accordance with PA. R.C.P No. 402 (b). A4?tj (5g Date: May 24, 2003 Andrew C. Sheely, Esquire C C 3 .- C :.rt Timothy J. Leach Plaintiff vs Case No. 03-2443 April D. Leach, Defendant Statement of Intention to Proceed To the Court: Timothy J. Leach, Plaintiff, intends to proceed with the above captioned matter. Print Name William R. Balaban, Esqu?Ui Narne 9 (,P _ Date: 12 October 2006 Attorney for Timothy J. Leach, Plaintiff Explanatory Comment The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has promulgated new Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 governing the termination of inactive cases and amended Rule of Judicial Administration 1901. Two aspects of the recommendation merit comment. 1. Rule of civil Procedure New Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 has been promulgated to govern the termination of inactive cases within the scope of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The termination of these cases for inactivity was previously governed by Rule of Judicial Administration 1901 and local rules promulgated pursuant to it. New Rule 230.2 is tailored to the needs of civil actions. It provides a complete procedure and a uniform statewide practice, preempting local rules. This rule was promulgated in response to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shop v. Eagle, 551 Pa. 360,710 A.2d 1104 (1998) in which the court held that "prejudice to the defendant as a result of delay in prosecution is required before a case may be dismissed pursuant to local rules implementing Rule of Judicial Administration 1901." Rule of Judicial Administration 1901(b) has been amended to accommodate the new rule of civil procedure. The general policy of the prompt disposition of matters set forth in subdivision (a) of that rule continues to be applicable. II Inactive Cases The purpose of Rule 230.2 is to eliminate inactive cases from the judicial system. The process is initiated by the court. After giving notice of intent to terminate an action for inactivity, the course of the procedure is with the parties. If the parties do not wish to pursue the case, they will take no action and "the Prothonotary shall enter an order as of course terminating the matter with prejudice for failure to prosecute." If a party wishes to pursue the matter, he or she will file a notice of intention to proceed and the action shall continue. a. Where the action has been terminated If the action is terminated when a party believes that it should not have been terminated, that party may proceed under Rule230(d) for relief from the order of termination. An example of such an occurrence might be the termination of a viable action when the aggrieved party did not receive the notice of intent to terminate and thus did not timely file the notice of intention to proceed. The timing of the filing of the petition to reinstate the action is important. If the petition is filed within thirty days of the entry of the order of termination on the docket, subdivision (d)(2) provides that the court must grant the petition and reinstate the action. If the petition is filed later than the thirty-day period, subdivision (d)(3) requires that the plaintiff must make a show in to the court that the petition was promptly filed and that there is a reasonable explanation or legitimate excuse both for the failure to file the notice of intention to proceed prior to the entry of the order of termination on the docket and for the failure to file the petition within the thirty-day period under subdivision (d)(2). B. Where the action has not been terminated An action which has not been terminated but which continues upon the filing of a notice of intention to proceed may have been the subject of inordinate delay. In such an instance, the aggrieved party may pursue the remedy of a common law non pros which exits independently of termination under Rule 230.2. a" G cia s=r , . ? r Timothy J. Leach, Plaintiff vs Case No. 03-2443 CIVIL April D. Leach, Defendant Statement of Intention to Proceed To the Court: Timothy J. Leach, Plaintiff, intends to proceed with the above captioned matter. Print Name Willia R. B lab5 In, Esq. Si=n Name ?j IriG Date: 8/31/09 Attorneyfor Timothy J. Leach, Plaintiff Explanatory Comment The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has promulgated new Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 governing the termination of inactive cases and amended Rule of Judicial Administration 1901. Two aspects of the recommendation merit comment. 1. Rule of civil Procedure New Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 has been promulgated to govern the termination of inactive cases within the scope of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure. The termination of these cases for inactivity was previously governed by Rule of Judicial Administration 1901 and local rules promulgated pursuant to it. New Rule 230.2 is tailored to the needs of civil actions. It provides a complete procedure and a uniform statewide practice, preempting local rules. This rule was promulgated in response to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shop v. Eagle, 551 Pa. 360,710 A.2d 1104 (1998) in which the court held that "prejudice to the defendant as a result of delay in prosecution is required before a case may be dismissed pursuant to local rules implementing Rule of Judicial Administration 1901." Rule of Judicial Administration 1901(b) has been amended to accommodate the new rule of civil procedure. The general policy of the prompt disposition of matters set forth in subdivision (a) of that rule continues to be applicable. 11 Inactive Cases The purpose of Rule 230.2 is to eliminate inactive cases from the judicial system. The process is initiated by the court. After giving notice of intent to terminate an action for inactivity, the course of the procedure is with the parties. If the parties do not wish to pursue the case, they will take no action and "the Prothonotary shall enter an order as of course terminating the matter with prejudice for failure to prosecute." If a party wishes to pursue the matter, he or she will file a notice of intention to proceed and the action shall continue. a. Where the action has been terminated If the action is terminated when a party believes that it should not have been terminated, that party may proceed under Rule230(d) for relief from the order of termination. An example of such an occurrence might be the termination of a viable action when the aggrieved party did not receive the notice of intent to terminate and thus did not timely file the notice of intention to proceed. The timing of the filing of the petition to reinstate the action is important. If the petition is filed within thirty days of the entry of the order of termination on the docket, subdivision (d)(2) provides that the court must grant the petition and reinstate the action. If the petition is filed later than the thirty-day period, subdivision (d)(3) requires that the plaintiff must make a show in to the court that the petition was promptly filed and that there is a reasonable explanation or legitimate excuse both for the failure to file the notice of intention to proceed prior to the entry of the order of ternmination on the docket and for the failure to file the petition within the thirty-day period under subdivision (d)(2). B. Where the action has not been terminated An action which has not been terminated but which continues upon the filing of a notice of intention to proceed may have been the subject of inordinate delay. In such an instance, the aggrieved party may pursue the remedy of a common law non pros which exits independently of termination under Rule 230.2. } t. Ci i? AR". 2009 SEP -2 PH 3: 1 CUM David (D. Bueff Prothonotary KirkS. Sohonage, ESQ Solicitor V r.F CI, ?750 Penee X. Simpson 1" Deputy Trothonotary Irene E. W orrow 2 d Deputy (Prothonotary Office of the Prothonotary Cumberland County, 1Pennsykania 1) '3 . aA/ CIVILTERM ORDER OF TERMINATION OF COURT CASES AND NOW THIS 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2012, AFTER MAILING NOTICE OF INTENTION TO PROCEED AND RECEIVING NO RESPONSE -THE ABOVE CASE IS HEREBY TERMINATED WITH PREJUDICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PA R.C.P. 230.2. BY THE COURT, DAVID D. BUELL PROTHONOTARY One Courthouse Square • Suite 100 • Carlisle, P-.A 17013 • (717) 240-6195 • (Fax (717) 240-6573