Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-05273JOSHUA D. GUISE vs. ALICIA F. GUISE AND NOW, this IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff PENNSYLVANIA No.: 2001-5273 Defendant CIVIL ACTION -- CUSTODY ORDER day of December, 2001, upon the Petition for Special Relief of Plaintiff, Joshua D. Guise, it is hereby Ordered that Joshua D. Guise shall have custody of his daughter, Jordan Guise, from During the first only. Overnight visits to commence on Alicia Guise shall be responsible for transportation of the child from Alabama to Pennsylvania. Joshua Guise shall be responsible for transportation of the child from Pennsylvania to Alabama at the conclusion of his period of custody. BY THE COURT: to days of this period, his custody shall be during the day J. JOSHUA D. GUISE IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff PENNSYLVANIA vs. No.: 2001-5273 ALICIA F. GUISE Defendant CIVIL ACTION -- CUSTODY PLAINTIFF'S PETITION FOR PECIAL RELIEF PURSUANT TO Pa. R. Civ. P. 1915.13 AND NOW comes the Plaintiff, Joshua D. Guise, by and through his attorney Timothy J. Colgan, Esq., and files the instant Petition for Special Relief Pursuant to Pa. R. Civ. P. 1915.13 of which the following is a statement: 1. Plaintiff Joshua Guise is the natural father of Jordan Guise, born November 13, 2000 in Pennsylvania. 2. Defendant Alicia Guise is the natural mother of Jordan Guise. 3. Jordan Guise resided in Pennsylvania with her mother until May of 2001 when Alicia Guise relocated to Alabama without father's consent. 4. Until Jordan was removed to Alabama, Joshua Guise had regular contact and visits with his daughter. 5. Since May of 2001, Joshua Guise has not seen his daughter. 6. There is presently pending before this Court a Preliminary Objection regarding Jurisdiction or in the Alternative, Venue. 7. Without prejudice to the objection regazding the jurisdiction issue, Alicia Guise has offered to allow the child to come to Pennsylvania for two weeks beginning with December 18, 2001. 8. Per her proposal, during the first week she will only allow Joshua Guise to visit with the child during the day under her supervision. 9. Per her proposal, during the second week, Alicia Guise will return to Alabama, but her step-mother will come to Pennsylvania. 10. Alicia Guise will only consent to the visit if during the second week in Pennsylvania her step-mother has daily visits with the child of two hours per day. 11. Ms. Guise's step-mother will then return to Alabama with the child at the end of the second week. 12. Mr. Guise acknowledges that based upon the length of time that his daughter has been away from him that there needs to be a period of re-introduction and re-acclimation between father and child to best allow Jordan to adjust. ] 3. A two week visit is far too short a period of time for a visit between Mr. Guise and his daughter in light of the fact that he has not seen the child for nearly seven (7) months (more than''/z of Jordan's life) and given the re-introduction period that will be required to allow Jordan to feel comfortable in staying with her father. 14. Furthermore, a two week visit is faz too short when father and daughter will have no uninterrupted time together. Sald time is vital to re-establishing the bond between Jordan and her dad. 15, It is in the best interest of Jordan Guise to know her father and to have her father involved in her life. 16, The more time that passes and the older Jordan gets, the more difficult it will be for her and her father to re-establish their bond. 17, If the Court finds that the visit must be limited to two (2) weeks, only allowing Mr. Guise to have overnight visitation with Jordan during the second week will be contrary to the best interests of Jordan in that she will not have sufficient time to get to know her father and feel comfortable with him. 18. Mr. Guise believes that being responsible for all aspects of the care of his daughter during his time with her is an important part of the role of a parent and that it is vitally important in establishing the bond between father and daughter. 19. It is also believed and therefore averred that it is in the best interests of Jordan to know that her father is capable of caring for her appropriately and providing for her needs. 20. Establishing the aforementioned trust will take longer than one week of overnight visits to establish -- especially given Jordan's age and the length of time that she has been separated from her father. 21. Your Honorable Court can properly award the relief requested herein pursuant to its broad equitable powers conferred upon it pursuant to Rule 1915.13 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, which provides: At any time after commencement of the action, the court may on application or its own motion grant appropriate interim or special relief. The relief may include but is not limited to the award of temporary custody, partial custody or visitation; the issuance of appropriate process directing that a child or a party or person having physical custody of a child be brought before the court; and a direction that a person post security to appear with the child when directed by the court or to comply with any order of the court. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Honorable Court grant Joshua Guise an extended period of unsupervised overnight visitation with his daughter in Pennsylvania after an appropriate period of reintroduction between father and daughter. Respef/,cttj~f~'u~lly submitted, Date: ~t ^ /o~-O~ /' f7~~y \ `~'r- Timothy J. C g sq. WILEY, LENOX, COLGAN & MARZZACCO, P.C. 1 South Baltimore Street Dillsburg, PA 17019 (717)432-9666 ID# 77944 4 JOSHUA D. GUISE IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff PENNSYLVANIA vs. N®.: 2001-5273 ALICIA F. GUISE Defendant CIVIL ACTION --CUSTODY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 26th day of November, 2001, Timothy J. Colgan, Esq., attorney for Plaintiff, Joshua D. Guise, hereby certify that I served Plaintiff's Answer to Defendant's Preliminary Objection as to Jurisdiction on the party listed below by depositing same in the United States Mail, first class, postage pre-paid to the following addresses: Gregory R. Lyons, Esq. PO Box 969 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0969 Counsel for Defendant Date: ~y' 'M-O/ Respectfully submitted, r\ ~a.~ Timothy J. Col sq. WILEY, LENOX, COLGAN & MARZZACCO, P.C. 1 South Baltimore Street Dillsburg, PA 17019 (717)432-9666 ID# 77944 ~• ••~^= - .m:..x~.eti u.e ..5rvru$L-G.Y~APrb3SY45tY~ rtgn"" ~.....••......~+~~. ~~ ~1 V ~\ 1 ~; t !_ i l f ~ ~I1 r '. _~ L. _i l .. ~L. ~ l__ ~~ C:? _ ` .` e ~` Q \~ /~ ~\ ^\~\ V ~~ 1 '} 4_~ ~~ Federal Building, Il'h Flaor 228 Walnut Street P.O. Bax 969 (717) 221-9515 Harrisburg, Pennsyhania 1 71 08-09 69 F.9X 221-4559 December 20, 2001 ~~ ~ , ~ !~ Z~ FACSIMILE AND FIIiST CLASS MAIL The Honorable Kevin A. Hess Cumberland County Court House 1 Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013 re: Joshua D. Guise v. Alicia F. Guise Civil Action -Custody Case No.: 2001-5273 Dear Judge Hess: During our phone conference yesterday, you asked that I determine the availability of Alicia's step-mother, Sharon Ward, to bring Jordan to Pennsylvania. I just spoke with her and was told that she will do anything the Court directs. If the Court decides to order visitation over the holidays, I would appreciate if it would consider the following. Mrs. Ward informs me that her brother who is serving in the Air Force and has recently been stationed in Afghanistan, is returning home on Christmas Eve. Accordingly, Ms. Ward has asked that she not be required to be in Pennsylvania until Wednesday, December 26. If that is not possible, she would ask that you consider that she would be traveling with her husband who has taken a week of vacation from December 22 through January 2, 2002. While she and her husband are here, they will be staying in a hotel. Also, they will be driving to and from Pennsylvania. If you need any additional information, please call at your convenience. Very t yours, egory R. Lyons Senior Attorney cc: Timothy Colgan, Esq. Alicia Guise F, JOSHUA D. GUISE IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff PENNSYLVANIA vs. No.: 2001-5273 ALICIA F. GUISE Defendant CIVIL ACTION -- CUSTODY PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION AND NOW comes the Plaintiff, Joshua D. Guise, by and through his attorney Timothy J. Colgan, Esq., and files the following answer to Defendant's Preliminary Objection as to Jurisdiction: 1. Admitted in part, denied in part. Joshua D. Guise did file the custody action. However, the action was filed on September 7, 2001 not September 13, 2001. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted in part, denied in part. Mr. and Mrs. Guise were married on August 12, 1993. They were married in Newville, Pennsylvania not Newport, Pennsylvania. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Admitted in part, denied in part. Mr. Guise did sign the divorce complaint on November 6, 2000 at the request of Mrs. Guise. The child was born six weeks prematurely. By way of further answer, Mr. Guise did show material interest in the pregnancy and accompanied r. Mrs. Guise to many of her obstetrical appointments during the pregnancy. 7. Admitted. 8. Denied. Mrs. Guise did not immediately notify Mr. Guise when she went into labor. In fact, she had her sister call Mr. Guise after she had already been admitted to the hospital. Upon being notified, Mr. Guise, who was the only employee in the building where he works, immediately shut down the building and proceeded to the hospital. 9. Admitted in part, denied in part. Prior to the birth, Mrs. Guise did stop working. After the birth of Jordan, Mrs. Guise was medically cleared to return to work six (6) weeks after the delivery. During the pregnancy, Mr. Guise provided Mrs. Guise with approximately three times the amount of support which was eventually calculated by the Domestic Relations arm of the court. Mr. Guise paid for Mrs. Guise's rent, groceries, auto insurance, a joint loan, and her cable bill. Upon the birth of Jordan, Mrs. Guise immediately filed a complaint for child support and Mr. Guise has paid support pursuant to that order. Mr. Guise has continued to provide funds in excess of the court ordered amount of support. With regard to Mr. Guise's physical contact with Jordan, Mr. Guise made extensive efforts to visit with the child. However, every time Mr. Guise attempted to see Jordan he was confronted by Mr. Guise's brother-in-law and was harassed and physically threatened. 10. Denied. Mrs. Guise was evicted from her apartment because she chose not to work. She stated repeatedly that she believed it to be her right to stay at home with her child. Mr. Guise provided in excess of the legally required amount of support at all times prior to and after the -- birth of Jordan. During this time, Mr. Guise offered to have Jordan come and live with him on a temporary basis until Mrs. Guise could get back on her feet financially. Mr. Guise even offered to sign a stipulation indicating that the custody arrangement was temporary to allay Mrs. Guise's fears that Mr. Guise would not return the child. Mrs. Guise refused his offer of help. 11. Denied. Not only didn't Mrs. Guise ask for assistance from Mr. Guise, she didn't even inform him that she was being admitted to the hospital. Instead of informing Mr. Guise, she called Mr. Guise's mother and asked her if she would care for Jordan while she was in the hospital. Mr. Guise's mother said she would gladly watch Jordan but suggested that she ask Mr. Guise first. Rather than doing so, Mrs. Guise had her step-mother come from Alabama to care for Jordan. 12. Denied. Mrs. Guise is a nurse. There is an overwhelming need for nurses in the Harrisburg area. In fact, Mrs. Guise was offered her job back from her previous employer but declined. 13. After reasonable investigation, Plaintiff is unable to form an answer to this averment. 14. Admitted in part, denied in part. Mrs. Guise left for Alabama on May 9, 2001, not May 9, 2000. Plaintiff is without information regazding her personal belongings so as to formulate an answer. 15. After reasonable investigation, Plaintiff is unable to form an answer to this averment. 16. Denied. Mrs. Guise made unilateral decisions regarding the custody of Jordan without consulting Mr. Guise. Said decisions included the move to Alabama and the extent of ~, the involvement that she would allow Mr. Guise to have in Jordan's life. Mrs. Guise did not keep Mr. Guise apprised of her deliberations -- rather she would make decisions and communicate her fmal decision to Mr. Guise after the fact. 17. Admitted. 18. This paragraph contains a statement of law to which no answer is required. 19. This paragraph contains a statement of law to which no answer is required. 20. Denied. This paragraph contains a statement of law to which no answer is required. To the extent that an answer is required, Pennsylvania was Jordan's home state at the time Mrs. Guise removed her to Alabama. A child's home state is the state in which she has lived for six (6) consecutive months, or in the case of a child less than six (6) months old, the state in which she has lived from the time of birth with her parents or parent. Jordan Guise lived in Pennsylvania from birth on November 13, 2000 until she was removed from Pennsylvania on May 9, 2001 making Pennsylvania her home state. 21. Denied. Jordan has a very significant connection with Pennsylvania. Alicia Guise's mother, sister Tonya, brother-in-law John, and other family members live in Pennsylvania. The vast majority of Joshua Guise's family, including his mother, step-father, grandparents, brother, sister, aunts, uncles, and cousins, reside in Pennsylvania. Jordan was born in Pennsylvania. The obstetrician who delivered Jordan and the records related to the birth aze in Pennsylvania. The pediatricians who Gazed for Jordan and the records regarding Jordan's immunizations and well baby care during her first six months aze in Pennsylvania. Additional witnesses concerning Mrs. 4 Guise's health are located in Pennsylvania. Witnesses regazding the emotional and financial stability of the parties are located in Pennsylvania. 22. Denied. For all of the reasons stated above, Pennsylvania is a far more convenient forum in which to determine custody. With the exception of Mrs. Guise, all of the evidence and potential witnesses who are likely to be called in the fmal custody hearing are located in Pennsylvania. 23. Denied. The overwhelming majority of the evidence in this case is located in Pennsylvania. Defendant's averment is conclusory and offers no insight as to the substantial evidence which is more readily located in Alabama. 24. Denied. As previously stated, the majority of witnesses in this case are located in Pennsylvania. As to the care givers alluded to in Defendant's averment, Plaintiff is without information regarding these care givers and therefore cannot formulate an answer regarding their existence and possible testimony. It should be noted that Defendant has not been working or attending school while in Alabama and that the need for care givers and their existence is suspect. 25. Denied. Mrs. Guise is in a better financial position than Mr. Guise. She is being provided for by her father and step-mother to the extent that she does not need to work. She has incurred no legal fees throughout this matter as she is represented by a pro bono attorney. Conversely, Mr. Guise has private counsel and continues to support Jordan per the Cumberland County Domestic Relations order. ~- WHEREFORE, Plaintiffrequests that this Honorable Court: a. Overrule Defendant's Preliminary Objection as to Jurisdiction; and b. Retain this matter for the ultimate determination of physical and legal custody of Jordan Guise; and c. Enter an interim Order for Custody pending a final custody hearing in the matter as Mr. Guise has not seen his daughter since before May 9, 2001 and since there is presently no schedule in place for the upcoming holiday season. Respefct~f~ull/yam submitted, Date: ~~'t'l''1~/ iw/~T Timothy J. C lg WILEY, LENOX, COLGAN & MARZZACCO, P.C. 1 South Baltimore Street Dillsburg, PA 17019 (717)432-9666 ID# 77944 . M " JOSHUA D. GUISE IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff PENNSYLVANIA vs. N®.: 2001-5273 ALICIA F. GUISE Defendant CIVIL ACTION -- CUSTODY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 26th day of November, 2001, Timothy J. Colgan, Esq., attorney for Plaintiff, Joshua D. Guise, hereby certify that I served Plaintiff's Answer to Defendant's Preliminary Objection as to Jurisdiction on the party listed below by depositing same in the United States Mail, first class, postage pre-paid to the following addresses: Gregory R. Lyons, Esq. PO Box 969 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0969 Counsel for Defendant Date: /~ ~ Respectfully submitted, ~~~c. Timothy J. Cdlghrr!EsZ~: WILEY, LENOX, COLGAN & MARZZACCO, P.C. 1 South Baltimore Street Dillsburg, PA 17019 (717)432-9666 ID# 77944 ~ d 4 n C != ` r; '[''t~t} rj -- n~~ r 4 cn;- -<. - c; - ~- ;'~ "° - ~• - -- -~ w `3 -G i~ ~~ ~~ THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP By: Jeffrey 8. Rettig, Esquire Identification No. 19616 305 North Front Street P.O. Box 999 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0999 (717) 255-7639 Attorney for Defendant LORI COGLEY DOYLE, iN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA Plaintiff v. NO. 01-5373 ANDREW CHARLES STRONG, CIVIL ACTION -LAW Defendant NOTICE OF INTENTION TO FILE PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT OF NON PROS AND NOW, comes Andrew Charles Strong, by and through his attorneys, Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, LLP, to notify Plaintiff of his intention to file a Praecipe for Entry of Judgment of Non Pros in ten (10) days and state as follows: 1. This case was initiated by filing a Writ of Summons by Plaintiff on or about September 14, 2001. 2. A Rule to File a Complaint was obtained and served upon Plaintiff on October 26, 2001. 3. Plaintiff has not yet filed a Complaint and more than twenty days has elapsed since the service of the Rule to File a Complaint. 4' 4. This Notice of Intention to File a Praecipe for Entry of Judgment of Non Pros is being served on Plaintiff as indicated on the Certificate of Service and permits Plaintiff ten days in which to cure her failure to file a Complaint. If a Complaint is not filed within the next ten days, a Praecipe for Entry of Judgment of Non Pros will be filed with the court and the case will be dismissed. THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP By: ffrey B. Rettig, quire Date: ((/L~~ ~ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I do hereby certify that I sent a true and correct copy of the foregoing document to all counsel of record by placing a copy of the same in the United States first-class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: Lori Cogley Doyle 4516 Crooked Hill Road iiarrisburg, PA 17110 THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP By: Je y B. Rettig, Es ire Date: /( L~/6 ( s°.+ r, -~~ -.. ~ o `~ R l ~ ~.' f 77 ~. ~ raJ ~ -- " ? ~ ~;"~ ~ ~' :(_) t :.-~ < t~ -.~ ~~ Q IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JOSHUA D. GUISE, Plaintiff V. ALICIA F. GUISE, Defendant CIVIL ACTION LAW CASE NO.: 01-5273 DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION Or IN THE ALTERNATIVE VENUE AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, Alicia F Guise, through counsel, Gregory R. Lyons, Esq., and states the following in support of her objections to the jurisdiction of this Court and to the propriety of venue: 1. On or about September 13, 2001, Plaintiff, Joshua b. Guise, filed the subject Complaint for Custody. 2. The child that is the subject of Mr. Guise's complaint is Jordan Guise. 3. Mr. and Mrs. Guise were married on or about August 12, 1993, in Newport, Pennsylvania. 4. On or before May 30, 2000 Mr. Guise began anextra-marital relationship. On or about July 15, 2000, Mr. Guise moved out of the marital residence and established residency .. . , with his girlfriend. 5. At the time of the separation, Ms. Guise was in the middle of her second trimester of her pregnancy with Jordan. 6. Subsequent to the separation, Mr. Guise showed no material interest in the pregnancy of Ms. Guise. In fact, on November 6, 2000, just seven days prior to Jordan's birth, Mr. Guise signed a complaint for divorce. The complaint was served on Mrs. Guise two days after the birth. 7. Jordan was born on November 13, 2000. 8. When Ms. Guise went into labor, she immediately notified Mr. Guise. Mr. Guise was unwilling to leave work and did not arrive at the hospital until after the delivery began. 9. For several months prior to Jordan's birth and following the birth, Ms. Guise was physically unable to work. Nevertheless, Mr. Guise provided minimal financial support for Ms. Guise and Jordan and had only nominal physical contact with Jordan. 10. As a result of Mr. Guise's lack of financial support, Ms. Guise was evicted from her residence and was forced to find shelter for herself and Jordan at the residence of a girlfriend. 11. On or about May 4, 2000, Ms. Guise was admitted to the hospital for kidney surgery. She asked Mr. Guise for assistance with Jordan. Mr. Guise refused to care for Jordan except the night of Ms. Guise's discharge. 12. Following her discharge from the hospital, Ms, Guise found herself unable to obtain employment, in need of further surgery and unable to financially support herself and Jordan. 13. Faced with these untenable circumstances, Ms. Guise was convinced by her parents to make a visit to their home in Cullman, Alabama to give herself time to rest, both physically and mentally, and to take time to reorganize her life. At the time, Ms. Guise had no intention to YNT(S{.. ti make the move permanent. 14. On May 9, 2000, Ms. Guise left Pennsylvania with Jordan to visit her parents. Her personal belongings wereleft in Pennsylvania. 15. Shortly after arriving at her pazents' home, Ms. Guise decided it would be in the best interests of both herself and Jordan to establish a permanent residence with her pazents. Her pazents offered financial and emotional support that was missing in Pennsylvania. The pazents also offered the opportunity for Ms. Guise to continue her education to make a better life for her and Jordan. 16. At all times, Mr. Guise was kept apprized of Ms. Guise's deliberations. 17. Ms. Guise and 7ordan have remained in Cullman, Alabama since leaving Pennsylvania. 18. Pursuant to 22 Pa.C.S.A. § 5344, Pennsylvania Courts have jurisdiction of child custody matters if the Commonwealth is: 1) the "home state" of the child at the commencement of the proceeding; or 2) had been the "home state" of the child within the six months before commencement of the proceeding .. . 19. Pennsylvania Court may also exercise jurisdiction if it is in the best interest of the child, but only if the child has a "significant connection" with the Commonwealth and substantial evidence concerning the present or future caze, protection, training and personal relationships of the child is available in the Commonwealth. 20. Pennsylvania is not and has never been Jordan's "home state." 21. Jordan does not have a significant connection with Pennsylvania. 22. Furthermore, Pennsylvania is not a convenient forum to make a custody determination. x: - '~ ~ w 23. Substantial evidence concerning the present or future care, protection, training and personal relationships of the child is more readily available in Alabama. 24. All of Jordan's caze givers are located in Alabama as aze most potential witnesses. 25. Moreover, because of the comparative financial positions of the parties, it is more equitable for this custody matter to be determined in Alabama. WHEREFORE, the Defendant respectfully requests the Court to make a finding that it lacks jurisdiction to here this custody matter and to enter an Order dismissing the proceeding. In the alternative, the Defendant requests the Court to find this forum to be inconvenient and to either dismiss the proceeding or to transfer the matter to an appropriate venue in or about Cullman, Alabama. Respectfully Submitted, Gregory R. Lyons, Es . P.O. Box 969 Harrisburg, PA, 17108-0969 (717)221-4535 ID # 34428 #5T3~~d~~„ac-S ,sites, sFtt ~s~~4w.,> zt ,«l.. T.-_ 4 .~ 3.tro93NG ° ""~Y9varecsaxowdnw~=waxtaa:' f~ . ~' ~:~ ~. -v ~. .. ` ' = ~ z + ~- cr~ c: , ; ~ .~ c' ~_ R ,_> ~ =a z '" ~ v ,. r ~~ Nnv'" 0 2 2001 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JOSHUA D. GUISE, Plaintiff V: ALICIA F. GUISE,. Defendant CIVII. ACTION LAW CASE NO.: 01-5273 DEFENDANT'S BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PRELIMINARY OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION or IN THE ALTERNATIVE VENUE I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY and FACTS The subject of this custody action is Jordan Guise, an infant female. The parties were married on or about August 12, 1993, in Newport, Pennsylvania. On or before May 30, 2000 Mr. Guise began an extra-marital relationship. At the time, Ms. Guise was in her third month of pregnancy with Jordan. Upon learning of the affair, Ms. Guise attempted to persuade Mr. Guise to attend marriage counseling in the hopes of preserving the relationship. Mr. Guise resisted and eventually refused to attend. During the course of her pregnancy, Ms. Guise suffered various physical ailments that resulted in her taking a leave of absence from her employment under the provisions of the Family D 0 Leave Act. Ignoring his wife's difficulties and his mazital vows, Mr. Guise moved out of the marital residence and established residency with his girlfiiend. The move occurred on or about July 15, 2000. At the time of the sepazation, Ms. Guise was in the middle of the second trimester of her pregnancy. Subsequent to the separation, Mr. Guise showed no material interest in the pregnancy of Ms. Guise. In fact, on November 6, 2000, just seven days prior to Jordan's birth, Mr. Guise signed a complaint for divorce. The complaint was served on Ms. Guise two days after the birth. Significantly, Mr. Guise made no claim for custody. Jordan was born on November 13, 2000. When Ms. Guise went into labor, she immediately notified Mr. Guise. Mr. Guise was unwilling to leave work and did not arrive at the hospital until after the delivery began. For several months prior to Jordan's birth and following the birth, Ms. Guise was physically unable to work. Nevertheless, Mr. Guise provided minimal financial support for his wife and daughter and had only nominal physical contact with Jordan. Unable to pay her rent, Ms. Guise was evicted from her apartment and forced to find temporary shelter for herself and Jordan at the residence of a girlfriend. Unfortunately, her problems did not abate. On or about May 4, 2000, Ms. Guise was admitted to the hospital for kidney surgery. She asked Mr. Guise for assistance with Jordan. Mr. Guise refused to care for Jordan except the night of Ms. Guise's discharge. Following her discharge from the hospital, Ms. Guise found herself unable to obtain employment, in need of further surgery and unable to financially support herself and Jordan. Faced with these untenable circumstances, Ms. Guise was convinced by her pazents to make a visit to their home in Cullman, Alabama to give herself time to rest, both physically and mentally, and to take time to reorganize her life. She left for her parents home on May 9, 2000. Prior to leaving, Ms. Guise notified Mr. Guise of her plans. Her personal belongings were left in Pennsylvania. Shortly after arriving in Alabama, Ms. Guise recognized it would be in the best interests of both herself and Jordan to establish a permanent residence with her parents. Her parents offered financial and emotional support that was missing in Pennsylvania. The opportunity to live with her parents also provided Ms. Guise with the ability to continue her education and to obtain employment without the expense of daycare. She reasoned that none of this was possible if she returned to Pennsylvania. At all times, Ms. Guise kept Mr. Guise apprized of her deliberations. During the course of the Summer, the parties discussed custody and visitation. Ms. Guise believed it was important that Mr. Guise have the opportunity to establish a relationship with Jordan. Accordingly, she encouraged Mr. Guise to visit with Jordan during Mr. Guise's summer vacation and during the Labor Day weekend. Mr. Guise refused both offers. Instead, he filed the subject complaint on or about September 13, 2001. II. ISSUES A. When a Child Born in Pennsylvania Is Relocated to Another State Before the Child Is at Least Six Months Old and a Custody Action is not Commenced Until the Child is More Than Six Months Old, Can Pennsylvania be Considered the Child's "Home State?" SUGGESTED RESPONSE: NO. B. Is it in the Best Interest of Jordan Guise That This Court Assume Jurisdiction of the Subject Custody Complaint? SUGGESTED RESPONSE: NO. C. Is it in the Best Interest of Jordan Guise That the State of Alabama Assume Jurisdiction? SUGGESTED RESPONSE: YES. III. ARGUMENT A. When a Child Born in Pennsylvania TS Relocated to Another State Before the Child Is at Least Sia Months Old and a Custody Action is not Commenced Until the Child is More Than Sia Months Old, Pennsylvauia is not the Child's "Home State" and Jurisdiction is Absent. Pursuant to 22 Pa.C.S.A. § 5344, Pennsylvania Courts have jurisdiction of child custody matters if the Commonwealth is: 1) the "home state" of the child at the commencement of the proceeding; or 2) had been the "home state" of the child within the six months before commencement of the proceeding .. . The statute defines the term "home state" as: the state in which the child immediately preceding the time involved lived with his parents ...for at least six consecutive months, and, in the case of a child less than six months old, the state in which the child lived from birth with any of the persons mentioned. 22 Pa.C.S.A. § 5343. Pursuant to the clear and unambiguous provisions of the statute, Pennsylvania cannot claim to be a child's home state unless the child has lived in the commonwealth for at least six consecutive months. If, as here, the child relocates to another state before the child is at least six months old, the residency requirement is not met. B. It is Not in the Best Interest of Jordan Guise That This Court Assume Jurisdiction of the Subject Custody Complaint? Even if Pennsylvania is deemed to be Jordan's "home state," that determination does not automatically confer jurisdiction. Baines v. Williams, 431 Pa. Super. 72, 79, 635 A.2d 1077, 1080 (Pa. Super. 1993). jurisdiction only exists if it is in the best interests of the child. 431 Pa. Super. at 79, 635 A.2d at 1081. See also Dincer v. Dincer, 549 Pa. 309, 317, 701 A.2d. 21, 214 (1997). Thus the courts aze compelled to consider the quality and scope of the connections between the Commonwealth and the child and his or her parents. The legislative purposes of adopting the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, are stated at 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 5342. The purposes include an attempt to: assure that litigation concerning the custody of a child takes place ordinarily in the state with which the child and his family have the closed connection and where significant evidence concerning his caze, protection, training and personal relationships is most readily available. When the child and his or her parents have a closer connection with another state, the courts aze instructed to decline jurisdiction. Id. In recognition of this clear purpose, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has adopted a "maximum significant contacts test." Dincer v. Dincer, 549 Pa. at 319, 701 A.2d at 215. Thus, the courts must decline jurisdiction where significant contacts are not sufficient. Here, Jordan has only minimal contacts with Pennsylvania. She was born in the Commonwealth and her father continues to reside here. It must be remembered, however, that the father had little, if any contact with either Jordan or her mother before Jordan's relocation to Alabama. When given the opportunity, Mr. Guise made no attempt to bond with his daughter. Nor were there significant contacts with Jordan's grandpazents. Jordan's sole care giver during her residency in Pennsylvania was her mother. The contacts with Pennsylvania were brief and attenuated at best. Moreover, during the last months of her brief stay in Pennsylvania, Jordan was without a permanent residence. In contrast, Jordan has established a strong support network in Alabama. She lives there with her mother and maternal grandpazents. She has resided in the state since May 9, 2001. As a result, on November 9, 2001, Jordan will be able to claim Alabama as her "home state." Her ,, grandpazents have established a permanent residence in Alabama that has provided Jordan and her mother with a,sense of stability that was sorely lacking in Pennsylvania. Moreover, the overwhelming mass of evidence concerning Jordan's present and future caze, protection, training and personal relationships is found in Alabama. Based upon the foregoing, it is clear this Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the. subject custody action. C. It is in the Best Interest of Jordan Guise That the State of Alabama Assume Jurisdiction. The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act provides that a court having jurisdiction to make an initial decree may decline to exercise its jurisdiction if it finds that it is an inconvenient forum. 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 5348. The factors that maybe considered include whether another state has a closer connection with the child and his or her family and whether substantial evidence relating to the present or future care, protection, training and personal relationships of the child are more readily available in another state. Id. As stated in the preceding section of this brief, there is little doubt that Alabama currently has a closer connection with Jordan than Pennsylvania and that substantial relevant evidence is more readily available in Alabama. In addition, it is significant that the relocation of Jordan to Alabama was forced by Mr. Guise's failure to provide adequate financial support for 7ordan and his mother. The facts leave little doubt that Pennsylvania is an inconvenient forum and that the issues are better decided in Alabama. IV. CONCLUSION For all the foregoing reasons, the defendant, Alicia Guise requests this Court to sustain her preliminary objections and find that it lacks jurisdiction to decide this matter or, in the alternative, that it find that Pennsylvania is an inconvenient forum. Respectfully Submitted, ~' egory R. Ly ns Esq. P.O. Box 969 Harrisburg, PA, 17108-0969 (717)221-4535 ID # 34428 . .1. r! IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JOSHUA D. GUISE, CIVIL ACTION LAW Plaintiff ALICIA F. GUISE, CASE NO.: 01-5273 Defendant CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Rose McRedmond, certify that a copy of the Defendant's Brief In Support Of Preliminary Objection To Jurisdiction orln The Alternative Venue was served upon the person(s) listed below, by placing same in the United States Mail, First Class, addressed as follows: Timothy 7. Colgin, Esq. 1 South Baltimore Street Dillsburg, PA 17019 Date: D ~ ~ 1 / ~'! /~~~ ~~-- Rose McRedmond, Legal Clerk P.O. Box 969 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0969 717/221-4515 „~ NOV 2 ~ 2001 JOSHUA D. GUISE vs. ALICIA F. GUISE Plaintiff Defendant I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY AND FACTS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No.: 2001-5273 CIVIL ACTION -- CUSTODY Joshua Guise and Alicia Guise are the natural parents of a minor daughter, Jordan Guise, born on November 13, 2000 in Pennsylvania. A~Ithough the parties were separated at the time of the birth of Jordan, Mr. Guise actively participated in his daughter's life until May 9, 2001, when Alicia Guise left Pennsylvania for Alabama. She initially told Mr. Guise that she was merely going to Alabama to visit for two (2) weeks with her father and step-mother. However, on May 24, 2001, Ms. Guise notified Mr. Guise that she did not intend to return to Pennsylvania and that she would be staying permanently in Alabama with Jordan. Although Mr. Guise did not agree with Ms. Guise's decision to relocate, he was not financially able at that time to file an action with the court to compel the return of the child to Pennsylvania. Mr. Guise and Ms. Guise communicated regarding a schedule of custody that would be acceptable to both parents. When the parties agreed, Mr. Guise had a custody stipulation prepared and forwarded to Ms. Guise in Alabama for her signature. The agreement of the parties called for 1 Mr. Guise's fast period of custody with Jordan to be for three weeks commencing with August 13, 2001. On August 8, 2001, Ms. Guise e-mailed Mr. Guise stating that she would not be bringing the child to Pennsylvania for Mr. Guise's period of custody. Upon receiving the aforementioned email, Mr. Guise filed a petition for custody in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County on September 7, 2001. A custody conciliator conference was scheduled for October 10, 2001. The conference was rescheduled at the request of Ms. Guise's attorney because of Ms. Guise's unavailability. On October 17, 2001, the same day as the rescheduled conciliation conference, Ms. Guise filed a Preliminary Objection to Jurisdiction or in the Alternative Venue. II. ISSUES A. DOES PENNSYLVANIA HAVE "HOME STATE" JURISDICTION IN A CUSTODY ACTION WHERE A CHILD WAS BORN IN PENNSYLVANIA ON NOVEMBER 13, 2000 AND CONTINUED TO RESIDE IN PENNSYLVANIA UNTIL HER MOTHER REMOVED THE CHILD FROM THE STATE WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE FATHER TO ALABAMA ON MAY 9, 2001? SUGGESTED ANSWER: YES. B. DOES ALABAMA HAVE "SIGNIFICANT CONTACTS" JURISDICTION WHEN THE CHILD'S ONLY CONNECTION WITH THE STATE IS THAT HER MATERNAL GRANDFATHER HAS RECENTLY TAKEN UP RESIDENCE THERE? SUGGESTED ANSWER: NO. III. ARGUMENT A. PENNSYLVANIA HAS "HOME STATE" JURISDICTION IN A CUSTODY ACTION WHERE A CHILD WAS BORN IN PENNSYLVANIA ON NOVEMBER 13, 2000 AND CONTINUED TO RESH)E IN PENNSYLVANIA 2 UNTIL HER MOTHER REMOVED THE CHILD FROM THE STATE WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE FATHER TO ALABAMA ON MAY 9, 2001. Jurisdiction in child custody cases in Pennsylvania is determined by the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (hereinafter, the Act). 23 Pa. C.S. 5341, et seq. The Act has three major bases for jurisdiction: §5344(a)(1) provides for "home jurisdiction"; §5344(a)(2) provides for jurisdiction based on "significant contacts" among the various parties to the custody action and the locale in which the action has been brought; and §5344(a)(3) provides for "pazens patriae" jurisdiction for emergency situations in which a child is abandoned, abused or dependent. Hattoum v. Hattoum, 295 Pa. Super. 169, 441 A.2d 403 (1982). The preferable basis for jurisdiction under the Act is the "home state" jurisdiction under §5344(a)(1). "Home state" jurisdiction exist when Pennsylvania is the home state of the child at the time of commencement of the proceeding or Pennsylvania had been the home state of the child within six months before commencement of the proceeding and the child is absent from the Commonwealth because of her removal or retention by a person claiming her custody or for other reasons. 23 Pa. C.S. 5344. A child's home state is the state in which the child, immediately preceding the time involved, lived with her pazents, a parent or person acting as parent, or in an institution, for at least six (6) consecutive months, and, in the case of a child less than six (6) months old, the state in which the child lived from birth with any of the persons mentioned. 23 Pa. C.S. 5343. "Home state" jurisdiction is the preferable basis for jurisdiction under the Act because the Act's primary purpose is to deter abductions, unilateral removal, and improper retention of children 3 by one of the parents in order to thwart a custody award or to gain an upper hand in the custody fight. Tettis v. Boyum, 317 Pa. Super. 8, 13, 463 A.2d 1056, 1058 (1983). In the present case, Pennsylvania has "home state" jurisdiction of Jordan Guise because Pennsylvania was the home state of Jordan Guise within six months before commencement of the proceeding and Jordan is absent from this Commonwealth because of her removal or retention by her mother claiming her custody. Jordan lived in Pennsylvania from birth on November 13, 2001 until May 9, 2001 when Alicia Guise determined that she was moving permanently to Alabama. The instant custody. action was filed in Pennsylvania on September 7, 2001. Alabama does not have home state jurisdiction of the instant custody action because Alabama was not the home state of Jordan Guise at the commencement of this action nor was Alabama the home state of Jordan Guise six months prior to the commencement of this action. B. ALABAMA DOES NOT HAVE "SIGNIFICANT CONTACTS" NRISDICTION BECAUSE THE CHILD'S ONLY CONNECTION WITH THE STATE IS THAT HER MATERNAL GRANDFATHER HAS RECENTLY TAKEN UP RESIDENCE THERE. Even when the court determines the home state of the child is Pennsylvania, the court can decline to exercise jurisdiction where there aze significant contacts with another jurisdiction and where there is substantial evidence in that other jurisdiction concerning the present or future caze, protection, training, and personal relationships of the child. 23 Pa. C.S. 5344(a)(2). However, there are no such significant contacts with the state of Alabama in this case. The only contact the child has with Alabama is that her maternal grandfather now resides there. Furthermore, the maternal grandfather is not even a long time resident of Alabama. He is a retired 4 member of the armed services who was stationed at many different bases throughout his career. Only after retiring from the military did he decide to move to Alabama. Ms. Guise has no other family or contacts with the state of Alabama. Alicia Guise's mother, sister Tonya, brother-in-law John, and other family members live in Pennsylvania. The vast majority of Joshua Guise's family, including his mother, step-father, grandpazents, brother, sister, aunts, uncles, and cousins, reside in Pennsylvania. Additional information and witnesses who aze critical to the ultimate deternunation of the issue of the primary physical custody of Jordan are also in Pennsylvania. Jordan was born in Pennsylvania. The obstetrician who delivered Jordan and the records related to the birth are in Pennsylvania. The pediatricians who cared for Jordan and the records regarding Jordan's immunizations and well baby care during her first six months aze in Pennsylvania. Alicia Guise has identified her alleged poor health as a reason for moving to Alabama. Ms. Guise's health and her ability to properly Gaze for Jordan will be an issue in determining who is best suited to care for Jordan on an ongoing, day to day basis. Alicia's health caze providers and the medical records regarding her kidney ailment are in Pennsylvania. In examining Ms. Guise's fitness to be the primary custodian of Jordan, Mr. Guise intends on calling prior landlords and employers as witnesses on the issue of Alicia's emotional and financial stability. All of those witnesses as well as their records and documentation are in Pennsylvania. On balance, the overwhelming majority of information regarding this case is in Pennsylvania and there is virtually no connection to the state of Alabama otter than that Alicia Guise has decided to move there. 5 IV. CONCLUSION Because Pennsylvania was the home state of Jordan Guise within six (6) months of the commencement of the instant custody action, Pennsylvania has "home state" jurisdiction pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act found at 23 Pa. C.S. 5341, et seq. Notwithstanding the fact that Pennsylvania has home state jurisdiction, Pennsylvania could defer its jurisdiction to Alabama, if Alabama has a significant connection with the child and her family or if there is substantial evidence in Alabama. In this case, there is no significant connection with Alabama and there is not substantial evidence in Alabama. Therefore Pennsylvania has, and should retain, jurisdiction of the instant custody action. Respectfully sub'm''i~tte~dj Date: ~~ Z6 `~ ~ ~~'~' ~~~ Timothy J. C gan, sq. WILEY, LENOX, COLGAN & MARZZACCO, P.C. 1 South Baltimore Street Dillsburg, PA 17019 (717)432-9666 ID# 77944 6 ~.` m,:. .. JOSHUA D. GUISE IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, Plaintiff PENNSYLVANIA vs. No.: 2001-5273 ALICIA F. GUISE Defendant CIVIL ACTION --CUSTODY CERTIFICATEIOF SERVICE AND NOW, this 26th day of November, 2001, Timothy J. Colgan, Esq., attorney for Plaintiff, Joshua D. Guise, hereby certify that I served Plaintiff s Brief in Opposition to Defendant's Preliminary Objection as to Jurisdiction on the party listed below by depositing same in the United States Mail, first class, postage pre-paid to the following addresses: Gregory R. Lyons, Esq. PO Box 969 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0969 Counsel for Defendant Respect ly submitted, Date: ~~ u 'O/ Timothy J. C gan, Esq. WILEY, LENOX, COLGAN & MARZZACCO, P.C. 1-South Baltimore Street Dillsburg, PA 17019 (717)432-9666 ID# 77944 >- .. JOSHUA D. GUISE IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. ALICIA F. GUISE DEFENDANT 01-5273 CIVIL ACTION LAW IN CUSTODY AND NOW, Thursday, September 13, 2001 ,upon consideration of the attached Complaint, it is hereby directed that parties and their respective counsel appear before Jacqueline M. Verney, Esq. ,the conciliator, at 4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle on Wednesday, October 10, 2001 at 2:30 PM for aPre-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/ ac ueli a ern 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 reasonab]e 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 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Telephone (717) 249-3166 if. '~Yh~' - ~suirom¢~aean~uk:uwsa~ti~w~,w; m~ e~ .:~: U. :.~.u.::.,>,.~ _,.w mea,~ . _ - ..••,"wsut i ~ Y ~t1~ ~e~~~~),~WN~3~itiil~ i.1Pv~~•_~ ~. .~_ z*1 :! ~n~ ~ 1 d;5 i0 i` , -?:) ~~.''ICiN.~r ~ ~~ :~ i,~', JOSHUA D. GUISE ~s. ALICIA F. GUISE Plaintiff Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA N®. of ~ Sa ~ CIVIL ACTION -- LAW ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, upon consideration of the attached complaint, it is hereby directed that the parties and their respective counsel appeaz before conciliator, at the on the day of 2~ at .m., for aPre-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 the scheduled hearing. FOR THE COURT, by: Custody Conciliator 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 wntact 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 THLS 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 LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE 2 LIBERTY AVENUE CARLISLE, PA 17013 (717)249-3166 JOSHUA D. GUISE Plaintiff vs. ALICIA F. GUISE Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. Ol' ~$'~ CIVIL ACTION -- LAW COMPLAINT FOR CUSTODY AND COMES NOW, JOSHUA D. GUISE, by his attorney, Timothy J. Colgan, Esq., and files the following Petition: 1. Plaintiff, JOSHUA D. GUISE, resides at 602 Louisa Lane, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania since August 2000. 2. Defendant, ALICIA F. GUISE, resides at 1398 County Road 972, Cullman, Alabama since May 24, 2001. 3. Plaintiff and Defendant are the natural parents of one minor child, Jordan L. Guise, dob 11 /13/00. 4. The child was not born out of wedlock. 5. Prior to May 24, 2001, the child resided with mother at 115 Hillside Road, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. From November 13, 2000 to March 13, 2001 the child resided with the Mother at 1010 Susquehanna Street, Apartment 1, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. 6. There are no court orders establishing custody or visitation. 7. Plaintiff has no information of a custody proceeding concerning the children pending in a court of this Commonwealth. 8. Plaintiff does not know of a person not a party to the proceedings who has physical custody of the children or claims to have custody or visitation rights with respect to the children. 9. Without father's consent and without Court Order, Mother removed the child to Alabama 10. Mother assured Father that she would allow for visits with the minor child. 11. Mother went so faz as work out with Father dates and times for an extended visit during summer 2001. 12. Mother had Father's attorney draft a stipulation reflecting the terms of their agreement. Said agreement called for Father to have the child for three consecutive weeks beginning August 13, 2001. See proposed stipulation attached as Exhibit A. 13. Shortly before the scheduled visit, on August 8, 2001, Mother emailed Father and indicated the child would not be coming to Pennsylvania as previously planned. See email message attached as Exhibit B. 14. The best interest and permanent welfare of the children will be served by granting the relief requested herein. WFIEREFORE, Plaintiff requests the Court enter an Order granting primary physical custody and shared legal custody of the minor child to Plaintiff. Dated: 9" y Respectful y submitted, ~~._~ Timothy J. Colgafi, ESgnife WILEY, LENOX, COLGAN & MARZZACCQ P.C. 1 South Baltimore Street Dillsburg, PA 17019 (717)432-9666 I.D. #77944 VERIFICATION I, JOSHUA D. GUISE, verify that the statements made in this document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: ~~ " d JOS D. GUISE Plaintiff ~ ~ ~ ~ r '`~ p~ C C ~ o v~' ~ _'_ z ~' -° rt ,~ 4.,. 'L~ ~_,,:... ~~ ~ J;>= D~ ~ ~n Q 1 JOSHUA D. GUISE, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION -LAW 01-5273 CIVIL ALICIA F. GUISE, Defendant IN RE: DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, VENUE ORDER AND NOW, this 2 ? `"~ day of October, 2001, a brief hearing on the within matter is set for Thursday, November 29, 2001, at 9:00 a.m. in Coumoom Number 4, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, PA. The court will consider requests under Pa.R.C.P. 1930.3. BY THE COURT, Timothy J. Colgan, Esquire For the Plaintiff Gregory R. Lyons, Esquire For the Defendant :rlm ~'i7( Hess, J. ~°-(~ ~d Cio -zv-o~ ~~ ~ a ~~n!cr;3~,s~~~~rG ZG' ~~ fd~ ~~ 1.:1~ f~ 1f ri_ i,. ~~F' ~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JOSHUA D. GUISE, CIVIL ACTION LAW ~-y c~ c, Plaintiff =' -ocM ~ - -~ _ _ ALICIA F. GUISE, CASE NO.: 01-5273 z ~~ '~ <` `:. Defendant ~ r.~ DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTI®N TO JURISDICTION Or IN THE ALTERNATIVE VENUE AND NOW, comes Plaintiff, Alicia F Guise, through couasel, Gregory R. Lyons, Esq., and states the following in support of her objections to the jurisdiction of this Court and to the propriety of venue: 1. On or about September 13, 2001, Plaintiff, Joshua D. Guise, filed the subject Complaint for Custody. 2. The child that is the subject of Mr. Guise's complaint is Jordan Guise. 3. Mr. and Mrs. Guise were married on or about August 12, 1993, in Newport, Pennsylvania. 4. On or before May 30, 2000 Mr. Guise began an extra-mazital relationship. On or about July 15, 2000, Mr. Guise moved out of the marital residence and established residency .r+ t with his girlfriend. 5. At the time of the sepazation, Ms. Guise was in the middle of her second trimester of her pregnancy with Jordan. 6. Subsequent to the separation, Mr. Guise showed no material interest in the pregnancy of Ms. Guise. In fact, on November 6, 2000, just seven days prior to Jordan's birth, Mr. Guise signed a complaint for divorce. The complaint was served on Mrs. Guise two days after the birth, 7, Jordan was born on November 13, 2000. 8. When Ms. Guise went into labor, she immediately notified Mr. Guise. Mr. Guise was unwilling to leave work and did not arrive at the hospital until after the delivery began. 9. For several months prior to Jordan's birth and following the birth, Ms. Guise was physically unable to work. Nevertheless, Mr. Guise provided minimal financial support for Ms. Guise and Jordan and had only nominal physical contact with Jordan. 10. As a result of Mr. Guise's lack of financial support, Ms. Guise was evicted from her residence and was forced to find shelter for herself and Jordan at the residence of a girlfriend. 11. On or about May 4, 2000, Ms. Guise was admitted to the hospital for kidney surgery. She asked Mr. Guise for assistance with Jordan. Mr. Guise refused to caze for Jordan except the night of Ms. Guise's discharge. 12. Following her discharge from the hospital, Ms. Guise found herself unable to obtain employment, in need of further surgery and unable to financially support herself and Jordan. 13. Faced with these untenable circumstances, Ms. Guise was convinced by her parents to make a visit to their home in Cullman Alabama. to give fierself time to rest, both physically and mentally, and to take time to reorganize her life. At the time, Ms. Guise had no intention to make the move permanent. 14. On May 9, 2000, Ms. Guise left Pennsylvania with Jordan to visit her pazents. Her personal belongings were left in Pennsylvania. 15. Shortly after arriving at her pazents' home, Ms. Guise decided it would be in the best interests of both herself and Jordan to establish a permanent residence with her pazents. Her pazents offered financial and emotional support that was missing in Pennsylvania. The parents also offered the opportunity for Ms. Guise to continue her education to make a better life for her and Jordan. 16. At all times, Mr. Guise was kept apprized of Ms. Guise's deliberations. 17. Ms. Guise and Jordan have remained in Cullman, Alabama since leaving Pennsylvania. 18. Pursuant to 22 Pa.C.S.A. § 5344, Pennsylvania Courts have jurisdiction of child custody matters if the Commonwealth is: 1) the "home state" of the child at the commencement of the proceeding; or 2) had been the "home state" of the child within the six months before commencement of the proceeding .. . 19. Pennsylvania Court may also exercise jurisdiction if it is in the best interest of the child, but only if the child has a "significant connection" with the Commonwealth and substantial evidence concerning the present or future care, protection, training and personal relationships of the child is available in the Commonwealth. 20. Pennsylvania is not and has never been Jordan's "home state." 21. Jordan does not have a significant connection with Pennsylvania. 22. Furthermore, Pennsylvania is not a convenient forum to make a custody determination, z .... ,- ..... . ; 23. Substantial evidence concerning the present or future caze, protection, training and personal relationships of the child is more readily available in Alabama. 24. All of Jordan's care givers are located in Alabama as aze most potential witnesses. 25. Moreover, because of the comparative financial positions of the parties, it is more equitable for this custody matter to be determined in Alabama. WHEREFORE, the Defendant respectfully requests the Court to make a finding that it Lacks jurisdiction to here this custody matter and to enter an Order dismissing the proceeding. In the alternative, the Defendant requests the Court to find this forum to be inconvenient and to either dismiss the proceeding or to transfer the matter to an appropriate venue in or about Cullman, Alabama. Respectfully Submitted, ~iegory R. Lyons, Es . P.O. Box 969 Harrisburg, PA, 17108-0969 (717)221-4535 ID # 34428 JOSHUA D. GUISE, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION -LAW 01-5273 CIVIL ALICIA F. GUISE, Defendant ORDER AND NOW, this ~ ~ " day of December, 2001, following conference call with counsel, it is ordered and directed that the mother or her designated agent bring to Pennsylvania the child, Jordan, for the purpose of visitation and partial custody of the plaintiff, Joshua D. Guise, said custody to be exercised by the father between December 26, 2001, and January 6, 2002. The first two periods of visitation, anticipated to be December 27a' and 28`h, shall be for a period of five (5) hours with the mother or her agent, Sharon Ward, either present or nearby. Thereafter, the child shall be in the care of her father, who shall return the child to Alabama on January 6, 2002. During the father's custody of the child, the mother or her designated agent shall have the option, but shall not be required, to be with the child for no less than one (1) hour daily. BY THE COURT, ~ _ /`~ ~ , Kev' A. Hess, J. Timothy J. Colgan, Esquire ~,p~ For the Plaintiff ~ / L_u(y~O'I Es uire CS=" ~ / V / Gregory R. Lyons, q 0~ For the Defendant I 1 5 p~lNS}'LU„t~rq ~ ~~ f1F('-?1-?G1G11 1~:?R FRf1M:WTl FY I FNf1X C:fll WGN 7174:3Pg4?f, Tf7:171777??9R9 FAx TRAl`~TS~ISSIO~T WiLL+Y~ T.LNOX & COLCAM, P.C. ~ $9YTw C•I TINORE STREET' D~usBURd. PA ~ 701 a t71 7) 432.5666 Fwx: (7171 43c•0426 To: The Honorable T{evin A. Hess; auci 1)atc: }~CCen117GY 2i, 2UU1 Attorney Ureg Lyons Faa #i: 717-240-6462 1'agcs: 2, including, this cover sheet. 717-'l"ll-4SS4 From: Timothy J. Colgan, J/sy. Subject: Guise v. Guise COMMENTS: P. G1G11 ~G1Vl? (h•igiual will noR fallow this fax transmission. The material contained an this fax i8 attorney privileged and cOnildentlaL If you are nul the iulcnded recipient, please call the sender immediately, tf all pages are nut received, please call the number listed above flFf"-?1 -PRGI1 13:?R FRf1M: WTI FY I FNf1X f'nl rAN 7174?A4Pf, Tn: 171777??9R9 P. <IRP~IIR? THE WILEY GRCIUP wrurneys nt Lew Wiley • Lenox • Colgan •Marzzacco • F'.C. December ~1, ~OOt VIA FACSIMILE ONLY TU (7I712dQ-ddd2 "'fhe Honorable Kevin A. Hess Cumberland County Court of Common .Pleas Cumberland C'nunty Cnurthousr. 1 Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17U1J Re: Joshua D. Guise v. Alicia F. Guise Cumberland County Docket No.: 2UUl-S'L%3 Custody near Judge Hess: My client. retained counsel in Alabama to protect his interests with regard Co the custody acliun filet( ui Alttl)atna. I~ ~ speaking with Alabama counsel, l was informed that it dots not appear that there is any hearing scheduled in the Alabama court for January 1 U, 2001 w allegrat by Attorney Lyons during our conference call this Wednesday. 't'herefore, my client wishes to renew his request that he be k~unted visitation with Jordan now rather than waiting until there has been a hearing in Alabama or until the jurisdictional question has been resolved. Thank you for your continued assistance in this matter. Very truly yours, WILEY, LENOX, COi,GAN b% MAIL%'L.A000, Y.C. by Timothy J. Colgan rx:r~ cc: Jachua D. Guaie Gregory Lyme, Esy. (via I'ucsimile only to 717-221.45SA) Jan M. WiICy + (]avid 1- Lenox • Timothy 1- Colgan • Christopher 1. Marzzacco + Christine 1. Taylor 1 south lialtimnre Street • Uillsburg, NA 77U79 • Phone: (7't7) 43'1-'(666 • (StJU) 6ti2-a25U • Fax: (7171432-U426 Offices in Harrisburg • vork • Carbondale 12/20/01 TIiU 15:00 FA% 717 221 4554 U S TRUSTEE ~J002 U.S. Dgpaa~tment of Justice Office of the United States Trustee ..,. Adiddle District nf!'ettttsylvutziu f ed~rat Duitdin~ ] 1'^ t%loor 11B Walnud Street 1'.O. Box 969 (717)121.4515 llarrisbur8, Pennsytvanda 17108.0969 FAX 137-4554 December 2Q, 2001 FA(".SY7Vidi,F AN71 FIRST CT.,ASS MAIL The Honorable i~evln A. Hess Cumberland County Court House i Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013 re: Joshua D. Guise v. Alicia F. Guise Civil Action - C'.ustndy Case No.: 2001-5273 Dear Judge Hess: Auring out phone conference yesterday, you asked that I datcrnxinc the availability ofAlicia's step-mother, Sharon Ward, to bring Jordan to Pennsylvania. I just spoke v/ith her and was told that she will do anything the CourC directs. If the Court decides to order visitation over the holidays, i would appreciate if it would consider the following Mrs Ward informs me that her brother who rs serving in the Air Ponce and has recently been stationed in Afghanistan, is returning home on Cluisturas Eve. Acwrdingly, Ms. Ward has asked that she not be required to be in Pennsylvania until Wednesday, December 2G..lf that is not possible, she would ask that you consider that she would be traveling with her husband who has taken a week of vacation from December 22 through January 2, 2002. While she and her husband are here, they will be staying in a hotel, Also, they will be driving to and £ram Fennsylvania. Tf you need any additional information, please call at ynnr cnrwenienre Very tr yours, agony R Lyons Senior Attorney cc: 'himathy Colgan, >rsq. Alicia Chaise JOSHUA D. GUISE, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. CIVIL ACTION -LAW OI-5273 CIVIL ALICIA F. GUISE, Defendant IN RE: DEFENDANT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO JURISDICTION OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, VENUE ORDER AND NOW, this / `~` day of January, 2002, the preliminary objection of the defendant to jurisdiction is SUSTAINED and the within complaint DISMISSED. This order is entered with the understanding that this matter will proceed in the courts of Cullman County, Alabama. BY THE COURT, ~~ A. Hess, J. ~mothy J. Colgan, Esquire For the Plaintiff ,/Gregory R. Lyons, Esquire For the Defendant /'~The Honorable Terri Thomas 500 Second Avenue S.W. Room 209 Cullman, AL 35055 ~~p~ o~ `--- -- s a~ ~ S :rhn i ~~ .~ Nov z z 2ooy IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEA5 OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JOSHUA D. GUISE, CIVIL ACTION LAW Plaintiff V. ALICIA F. GUISE, CA5E NO.: 01-5273 Defendant ORDER PERMITTING TESTIMONY BY ELECTRONIC MEAN5 AND NOW, this -Z (o j day of November, 2001, upon consideration of the Defendant's request to provide testimony by electronic means, it is hereby ORDERED THAT Defendant's request is granted. By the Court, ~~ A. Hess, Judge of Common Pleas 5 ~~ ,1, `l• ~+,tl` ~ 7 ?- r,' =7 ~ ~_. ~~ __ r` '` -~ r ;l ) jam' `} -° -•~ ~ :~ f ....., ~i _ t~~ __, CJ S.,a --~~.w.*...C IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JOSHUA D. GUISE, Plaintiff V. ALICIA F. GUISE, Defendant CIVIL ACTION LAW CASE NO.: 01-5273 DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY BY ELECTRONIC MEANS PURSUANT TO PA. RULE OF CIV. PROCEDURE 1930.3 AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Alicia F. Guise, through counsel, Gregory R. Lyons, and states the following in support of her request to provide testimony by electronic means: 1. Joshua Guise filed the subject complaint for custody on or about September 13, 2001. 2. The subject of the custody action is Jordan Guise, an infant female born in Pennsylvania on November 13, 2000. 3. On May 9, 2001, Jordan moved with her mother to Cullman, Alabama, the home of Ms. Guise's parents. Both have since continued to reside with Jordan's grandparents. 4. On or about October 17, 2001, Ms. Guise filed preliminary objections to jurisdiction and venue. 5. A hearing has been scheduled for November 29, 2001. .., ~~~„x..... _ _. ... _ _. _, .. ... sre~u=.~~. 6. To the extent her testimony or the testimony of her parents is needed, Ms. Guise requests that the Court permit that testimony be done by electronic means. 7. Ms. Guise makes this request because of the costs involved, the uncertainty of air transportation and because she will be starting new employment within the next few days. 8. Counsel for Mr. Guise does not object to Ms. Guise's request. WHEREFORE, Defendant Alicia F. Guise respectfully requests the Court to permit her testimony and the testimony of her parents to be conducted by electronic means. Respectfully Submitted, °,~'/ egory R. Lyons, P.O. Box 969 Harrisburg, PA, 17108-0969 (717)221-4535 ID # 34428 C~ r~ t_ ... _ r v Sz? ~= rr j ,', c a ~'~, ~.; -® Cam,=' tt; {.~ y> °r -~ ~7 '"" vim; fV N c:~ `c] ~M1-rt _f_, ~'i ~" ra C-~ if7 t -~C JOSHUA D. GUISE, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Vs. NO. 01-5273 ALICIA F. GUISE, CML ACTION -LAW CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Wendy S. Paul, certify that a copy of the Defendant's Request to Provide Testimony by Electronic Means Pursuant to PA. Rule of Civ. Procedure .1930.3 was served upon the following person(s) listed below by placing same in the United States Mail, First Class, Postage Prepaid, addressed as follows: Timothy J. Colgin, Esquire 1 South Baltimore Street Dillsburg, PA 17019 (~ ~~~ Wendy S. Paul, Lega] Clerk P.O. Box 969 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0969 (717) 221-4515 Dated: November 15, 2001 tau nom,-..,,::. ,,,,~y,,.ue~r.mxwe~~ .,.~,~~ ,,..~~~.. __ - d C ~ ~~ .D ~= ~ -,~ <L ~Z_ c ~ ~ ~{ ~~ ~if