Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout99-00205 c INTERIM STIPULATION 1. Mother is to have primary residential custody. Father will have partial residential custody, defined as every other w.ekend from Friday at 6 p.m. until Sunday at 6 p.m., oommenoing with father having oustody this weekend, Friday, January 22nd, 1999, and alternating thereafter. Father will also have partial oustody for one evening per week depending on his work sohedule. He shall return the girls to mother's oustody later that same evening. 2. Until further order of oourt, Jennifer Oberheiser is prohibited from being the day care provider, 3. Father shall reschedule the medical appointment wIth Dr. Greenwald. He shall coordinate the time for such appointment wIth the mother so that both parents may attend. 4. Mother will notify father of the name, address, and telephone number of any child care provider which she has seleoted. 5, Mother and father both agrbe that until further order of oourt neither party will relocate the ohildren out of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 6, Until further order of oourt, mother and father stipulate that trips to and from Erie, Pennsylvania, to visit the grandparents are permissi ble by either mother or fat.her, 7, The parties st.ipulate that transfer of this oase to Franklin County is appropriate, John Tholllp.on, Plaintiff IN TRI COURT or COMMON PLIAS or CIJMBIIlRLAND COUNTY, PIIlNNSYLVANIA v, Dana Tholllpaon" Defendant. NO, 9g~2O.'J CIVIL TJlRM B:MB:RGENCY Cl:>>IPLAINT FOR CUSTODY 'I'hp Pldinlirr, ,/Ohll Thompson, by and UI1'UIJ(Jh hi.s attorney, Hichard C, (;aUnoy, ti los Ulis F:mol'goncy Complaint I.'or Custody and i.n :H1pport thllroof avnrs !:till i.ollo\~.i.ng: J. 'I'lw Plaintiff is ,fohn '1'llOmpson, an adult individual residlnCj 7?O Norlh lIanovor Stroot Apt: ~), in Carlis.1e, Cumberland County, I'enll;lylvani.a, :>. Tho Dofc!ndant: .i s Dana Thompson an adult: individual residing at: 12675 R.idgo Road, Groen Castle, F'ranklln County, l'onnsyI vani d. ], 'nIle l'iainLifr and DClfondant were nkllTlod In Sc~ptomber 19B9 and separated in Oct.ober 199B. They an' c:ontemp.1aLing <I no- fau.1t divorce. 4, The Plaint.lff and Defendant are t.he natural parent.s of t.wo minor children Brandy, age 6, born 9/6/92 and Sarah, age J, born 4/1/95, 5, Plaint.iff seeks to obtain custody of Brandy and Sarah. Since theIr b.irth the Chll.dron hdvl~ resided wi th t.he Plaintiff and Defendant at. the 12675 Ridgo Road, Green Castle, Pennsylvania. Since the part:.i.es' separaUon, tho Pla.intiff ilnd Defendant have agrend to an informa.1 arrarHJel[[r,nt where the Defendant has physical custody of both Sarah and Brandy. 6. c;lnco tho separat.lon, l'.IdirlL.i ff hdS (>n:iOYl~)d .Iibora.l vlsitaf:ion and hdS rnaInta.ined p()~Jil:.iV() n~.ldtionships wIth boLh Brandy and Sarah. "I. ~;jrlce tho sopar:ation, I'lainLiff lias consisl:ent.1y providod for flrandy and Sarah's ollJpport iJnd woll bo.i.ng by tenderinq $100,00 por wen!: lor Ihoir nl,nd,J ilwl eX[lrHISfJS. B. I'lairdi fl bo.11~,ves iJnd dvors that Ulere is a threat of inunediat 0 hdnn to both :~ar:all dnd lirdndy whi Ie UlOY are in the cane or the Uetondant. 9, Ilefclndanl. i ~ currently umploy(;d at Gl"(W() WorldwIde in (;r'ool! CiHlllo, "A "lid 11",1" ddlly work HcllodlJlu 01 :J I'.M, to 11 P,M. 10, tJur'ln<j tho por'lod;1 of, Lllllo of hor d,llly oJllploymont, Dafonddnt hilB pldc(,d ::dldh dlj(J HI'i1wly in ttlO privata c,'rnl of ,Ionnifor Olborhn.l;WI or WdYIIO~llioIT), PA, II. llurlll<J n'colII p(jrl(ld~'J or vlsitat 1011 with Hr'andy dud Sarah, PlainU 1'1' h,,,' baCOIIIO ,lwarn of fact.s alld circumst.ances that may portend so>:u" J dbus(l of ::arah and pmwibl y Br'iHldy t.hat. occurred wiLl] () I II t h., cust.ody of Defe1ndant. and I II UW care of ,Jenn I fe r Olbo rho i ell> r. 12, During thi" vi~J\.t, Plalnl,I.1'1' had a conversation with Sarah in which Salah indicated a gSlIeral discomfort with the care of Jellni hE Olber'iw.i ~wr, Wh(HI qllOSt:.i onEld rUrttl(~r, Sar'atl descdbmj incidont;, wid ch Pla.i nLl 1'f reasollilbl y beJjov(~s may involve i'l(Jxual abusu and pos31bly dlild molflsl,at Ion by t.ho 13 year old minor son or Jennifer Olborheiser. i3. Based on th.is .information, Pla.lnt.lff contacted the Pennsylvan.la Statu Poll.co, Chdmbrlulburq [larTack" and an invui'ltiqaUon is 110\/ pnndlnq, ]4, PiainLitf lias d.J.scussed thesc, .Incid.'nLs with tho Defendant. 15. ^s or th i s datEl, ducl t.o IHH fri.ondsllip with Ms. Olberheis("r, t.he f)Gfendant .is unwIlling or' unabLel to take precauUonarv measures and rGmovo tho Brandy and Si,lrah frcnothe daily care of Ms. Olberhe.lser. 16, Dllfondant j~l unwi.llinq or unablu to plolLlct the health, safety, and WGlI beinq of S.,rah and Brandy. i7, Tile P.lalnLiU' has no knowlfJdgo of any pHnd.l.nq IJetion for Cust.ody or: dny Ordur o[ Court. for CU'Jt.ody. if!, PlalnLi U is qiJinfully omplov(;d Hoadway I':xpnl~;s ilnd curnmtly mainta.i.n,J if two bedroom apar'trnent in Car.lls.1o. '19. P.1al nli ff is dbio and wl.1l.inq to providu a ,ll.ablo home envl ronrnont for Sarall and Brandy. 20, I'L1I nl. i ff IIOVI nJqllu~lt ,: till s Court to "Ill .'r an ordor grantinq him tornp{)rdlY cu;,todV {)f ::arall ilnd IJrdlldy ulltll the Penn~lylvdnia ~-~l(oIt.(~ P()lic(~ Irlv{~st.iq':II-.ion h(CIS concllldnd or tJoaring is schoduled in thi" 1ll,II,t(lL PLdnliff rurUlel ruqlw"t~3 that. thIs COllrt ord(;r tilell allY vi~,its wiLli D"COllclalll 1111 slJpnrvj~JncllJllt.l.I till s IIIdttor j~, nl~.I<i'1 vl"l. 16. Denied. l' 'it. Car,Usle, PennsY1v~ ie. 'Jonnc lives ,in d two bedroom do,o 00, o~vi "" " which j" "'",cho, '0 . 'P"'mo", io Addi"'OoliY, 1hc '~i:'.;~: f"o Pi"V tOe 'he ,;'If:;.:.,,. '"a whiCh wit 10 'h.J, mO'h" wh '10 ? '"'' 0 I w. y. "co' do, " '.0," k1. c b?""",,,,,.,, Of '100 ct., J" tho 'IObl. e"" "omOOI "'d . "', ',,"'v 10 '" ", "'''' g i" i 0 t ,; '." """ I.,.", y, 'h. h" j '1 no", '" 0 'ho · PO"'"""", , V '''' '"';';; . Who,,, "i "'0""10 ip 10" l'o'.d 11 v" with '10, 1, go, .. . to, 0" ",. I"., 10', I' . comi Og to iiv~OW~~h t/hlJ1 r c neVI "mommy" and I:hd't:Jllt:::;no/ril C'hIldcen that '. '0. I....., c',do.o '11, b, B. Ad", i t t Od , 9, Admitted, 10. Deril od 1'h specific fact'.' I} l/osPO/jCioli/: i i 11 .., ,,,, ,I"c'm , " W 110,." ''''W''dg. 'f 'he " ch 10'd 101m '0 b'j 0 '''0'0 000" 'od hy 1100 Po tj, i oner "'"P'od.., 1 '..vo '10" '10". m, Y I '10" tI"" .:y ~"'b h.wevo ". II", I 1>0 'P.. ,7, i':::::: l,,:~":ue, The 01b"h"." ;f .0 , '''e it"., "d Wit I. U,. I"bysi t t . ggested . 'Y""""'o, I'A, . ", d"nife, 11. DOnied 1'h Of tho 'lle f,' · Re,p'''d." I '. '1 U" . . and therefo';: ~~:d of" P/"""Ph "Iov'oo;"~.i',~ff '010", "OW10dg, ' g"P. 110"" 1. ."1.., ' . 0"., ~'if'o. 12, Denied 1'/ With tho Po,,, '0';" .. .""""001 10" .", .11 ""'"' . .eo~.~" 'h., .~' ~'h., 'h,o " h." '10, ~'i,ld 'h. j"i~,. ""?g" 00 d"o"" 'f:: 7~9: ""'''''' tho Ohl1d". i't": "1,1 'he P""bl. 'bo., by th, 'b'by.i,~t'~,' 'd h"i something to d~rw;l:h ., elln ,ter Oberhe,iser ' 13. Do"e,. Th' . "', ~:P:h;';~:e~i "".' 1 Y ";'d ",e..~:,,~~,: ~ i'f:::;: j c,,1 1 Y '.v 1,od th, investigation to "he bdbYsitt.er pending a Y;(Js,oh1duttishe WOUld /Jot take . " 0" Of "y 14. De/Jied 1~ R Of th, m,Oo, h,i <, e,p"".OI 10" b... " . "98. 'h,.' .", ""c, b'''h '''a '1~ "O"....y .".",,, "1) "'" 'g 0[ ei'r.::~dJ"' -"" Pt.o, ect 'd tho ";~'I i'hP," 'j' 0" '. OOlOb." I no], ChIle/ren 'lnd w'll ' , Sa ety dnd J cO/JtinUe to do ~o 15. Adm''''d, p " . tho p." 'Ion. " "",. D''''i'. In P,,, I 'loop" o.v 'd'':;:;' "'; od 'h" 'h'mbe "h'lOg S t,,: t'l ,'dm' tt'd tI." 1"".f'd I, 1. d~ ~,o"'" 110" ,. jO~"fg~ice'b'h'o """P', Pe , '.' 'h." '" "..e,.tt, " " , Pot "10"" 'fb :f'e, ''''0'''.'1'9 'he 'h,j:.,::" ': f"dlng " lo" "hodol. o'h., 1~'" 'he ..""". w"h 'h,I.: . '" 'he "', ""hi. v '?....... '''h Ih, Chl1.", '0 Po'd,", , '" '0 i'~'''g",:;, J; l~::~;'~'lfO p,,,o, '" ''''.'tJ''f1:::~,,::::' iI 'h." POI Ice. , . . y "'".,,,, by ,lto ct",,"o'Sl.. ., , . u/Jrg .'hdte 17. Adm! IIO(t, "'1), 1 0"... '0, k, "0" ""11" .it" RO'd.. y 9, Adroit led, 10, Admitted, 11. Denied, Thtl Respondent. is without knowledge of the specific facts and circumstances averred by t.he Pet.itioner which lead him to bel~eve that there may be sexual abuse, The Respondent is aware, however, that the Petitioner has suggested that there may be abuBe involved with the babysHter, Jennifer Olberheiser of Waynesboro, PA, 12. Denied. of the allegations therefore, further Thll Respondmll: is without sufficient kno~l.1.edge of Paragraph Eleven of Petitioners Petition and proof is demanded at trial. 13. Admitted in Part. Denied in Part. It is admHted that the Petitioner contacted the Chambersburg State Police, thru Trooper David Peck and requested that an investigation be initiated. It is den~Bd that an investigation is pending in that Trooper Peck, after intervif,wing the children, advised the Petitioner to discuss the situation with the Respondent, and to schedule other interviews with the childron to determine if there was anything verifiab~e to pursue an investigation, No investigation is currontly pendinq by Uw Chambersburg State Police, 14, Denied, The Respondent has not discussed the incidents with the Petitioner, other than to have the Petitioner tell the Respondent that he wan not returning the children to her as arranged on Janua.ry U, 1999 and it had something to do wHh possible abuse by the babysitters, Jennifer Oberheiser, son, 15. Denied, The Respondent specifically advised the Respondent direct.ly alld thrll his attorney, that she would not take the chlldren to the babysitter pending a resolution of any investi.gation. 16, Denied, The Respondent has been the primary caretaker of the minor children since birth ilnd since separation in October, 1998. The Respondent has protected the health, safety and wellbeing of the minor children and will continue to do so. 17. Denied, 'I'hn Plaintiff' was served notice on 1'uesday, January 12, 1999 which advised him that a Custody Order would be filed on Thursday, January 14, 1999 at 8:45 a.m, and at that Ume a temporary custody o::der ~lOuld be f: 110cL Plaintiff notified his attorney of this noU"e, al thollqh ho apparent! y did not providB him with a copy until late afternoon on WednBsday, January 13, 1999. 18. Admitted, ptJUtionar works for RoadHay E:xpress but works fluctuating shifts, dependIng on the noed, and which would require the Pet.itioner to be away from !lome, at sporadic timen which is not in the best interests of the children. 19, Denied, Pe.:itionur lives In a two bedroom apartment in Carlisle, Pennsylvania which is attached to a bar area and which does not provide any area for play for the children, Additionally, the chl~dren have always resided in FranklIn County with their mother, whIch is the stable ellvironmont and is in the best interest of the children, Lastly, the Petitioner li.ves with his current girlfriE'nd, whotle relationship has lasted approximately two months, and who has told the minor children that she is going to be thoir neH "mommy" and that the children will be coming to live with hIll' forever. 20, No Response is required to this allegation. HoweVer, it is denied that superVlsed visits are necessary in this matter, The Respondent has beon the primary cClretaker of the minor children and should continue to be the primary caretaker, 21, Denied. The Plaintiff was served notIce on Tuesday, January 12, 1999 which advitled him that a Custody Order would be filed on Thursday, January 14, 1999 at 8:45 a.m, and at that Ume a temporary custody order would be filed, Plaintiff noti.fied his attorney of this noti,:e, although ho Clpparently did not provide him with a copy until late afternoon on Wednesday, JClnuary 13, 1999. A custody complaint lias filed with F'ranklin County Court of Common Pleas on Thursday, January l4, 1999 and an Order of Court was entered accepti.ng the Complaint for fo'iling. Additionally, the Honorable Judge Douglas W, Herman, indicated his willingness to accept this matter in Franklin County Clnd to incorporate the Order of Court dated January 12, 1999 entered by the Honorable Judgo Guido, A copy of said Order of Court entered in Franklin County is attached hereto, made a part hereof, and marked Exhi bit "A". 22. Admitted in ~art, Denied in Part. It is admitted that it is in the best interest of the children for the Court to intercede in this matter. It is denied that Cumberland County is the proper Court to intercede, but rather, t.~e F'ranklin County Court of Common Pleas is thE! proper COllrt, 22. (Incorrectly numbered) Den....ed, Petitioner lives in a two bedroom apartment In Carlisle, Pen~sylvan.a which Is attached to a bar area and which doe~1 not provide any area for p.1 ay for the children, Additionally, tho children have always resided In ~'rankl in County with their mother, whi.ch Is t.he stable environmerlt ilnd is in the best interest of the chIldren. Lastly, the Petitioner lives with hIs current. girHdend, whose relatIonshi.p has lasted approximat.niy two months, and who has t.old Uw m.inor chIldren t.hat she :is qoing 1.0 be t.heir new "mommy" and thilt the chi.ldr'0n will be comll\q to llvn with her fornvnr. WHE:I(EFORE, Hespol\dnnt reflpnctfu.lly [(!quosts that. this Honorable Court enter an Order dismissing Potitioner's Petition and that this mattor be tl'iHlsferrl,d to Uw 'jurisdjct.ion of the E'ranklin County Court of Common pleas who has agreed to accept such jurisdiction and venue, Respectfully submitted, r (VI. ccCi D O~ &d~ZA caroll\.ReadI'lg~f:sqliT re U Attorney for Petitioner Dana M, Thompson Attorney No: 82041 PATRICK J. RE:DDING LI\\~ OFFICE 19 North Main Street ChambersbUrg, PI' 11201 717-267-1440 IN TO COURT OF CotH)N fLICAS OJ' Till: 3gTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT - FRANKLIN COUNTY BRANCH Dana M, Thompson, Civil Action - Law Plaintiff v, F,R. 1999- John 0, Thompson, Defendant Custody ORDU OF COURT AND DIRECTIVE FOR CONCILIATION Now this day of Order will notify John D, Thompson, Defendant, that sued in court to obtain custody of the children: i 1999, this you have been Sarah E. Thompson, datE! of birth 4/1/95, Brandy L. Thompson, date of birth 9/6/92, It is ordered and directed that , Esquire, the Court I s Child Custody Corlcifiation Offlcet., is hereby directed to conduct a Conciliation Conference on , 1999 at o'clock .m. ir, his office loC"ated 'at Franklin County Courthouse, Third- Floor, 157 Lincoln Way East, Chambersburg, Pennsy11ania 17201. The anticipated length of the Conciliation Conference is one hour, The parties along with their legal counsel shall <lppear in person at the designated time for the Conciliation Conference. A Memorandum shall be furnished to the Conciliator at least two days prior to the scheduled Conciliation Conferen=e pursuant to 39th Judicial District Civil Rule No, 1915.3 (b) (8; . Failure to provide said Memorandum may result in the imposition of sanctions. At the Conciliation Conference an effort will be made to see if the issues can be resolved by an agreement between the parties. If an agreement cannot be reached, the Conciliator will assist in defining and narrowin'~ the issues to reduce the time required for hearing by the Court. At the conclusion of the conference, the Concil.iator will prepare a Conference Summary Report for further action by the Court, You have the right to be reprosented by an attorney Who may attend the Conciliation Conference with you, If you have not secured an attorney by the date of the scheduled Conciliat.J.on Conference, you shall nonetheless personally appear at the time scheduled for the Conciliati.on Conference without an attorney, 1'he Plaintiff has deposited the sum of $100.00 with the Prothonotary for the cost of the Conciliation Conference and the Court reserves the right to further assign or divide these costs, John D, Thompson, Defendant, is notified that if you iail to appear as provided by th,i,E, Order or to bdng the children, an Order of Court for Custody, partial custody or visitation may be entered against you or the COllrt may issue a warrant for your arrest. Pending the hearing, w~th emphasis placed on the arrangements for the six months prllcedin9 the filing of this Complalnt and with particular att.ention paid to t.he role of primary caret.:.ker, the Court. hereby establishes the following temporary Order for custody pending a hearing: Primary custody :,hall be t.emporarily awarded to the Plaintiff with partial residential custody awarded to the Defendant such t.hat the Defendant. st.all hiwe custody right.s every other weekend on Friday at 6:00 p.m, through Sunday at: 6:00 p,m. 'fransportation will bll sharEld by the parties, The Defendant i.s hereby notified that if he disput.es the Plaintiff's averments regarding the current status of the custody arrangements and th:cs Order entered on the basis of those averments, he has the right to request a prompt conference with the Court, If the matter of temporary custody arrangements is not resolved at the conference, the Court may in atypical fact.ual situations and its sole discretion schedule a brief hearing limi ted to the i.3sues of determining temporary custody arrangement.s pending the scheduled Conciliation Conference. The parties and their legal counsel, if applicable, are hereby directed to e'lgage in meaningful negotiations to resolve this matter prior to the Conciliation Conference. YOU SHOULD TAKE 'rHIS P}IPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IE' YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNCT AFf,'ORD ONE, GO TO OR TE~LEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOlq TO nNJ OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Pennsylvania Bar Association Lawyer Referral Service 100 S Stree:, P,O, Box l8b Harrisburg, PA 11108 1-800-692-7375 (PA only); (717) 238-6715 By the Court, J. , , . IN TO COURT OF CON<<>N PLIWl or TO 3~TB JUDICIAL DISTRICT - rRANKLIN COUNTY BRANCR Dana M, Thompson, Civil Action - Law Plaintiff v, F,R. 1999- John D, Thompson, Defendant Custody C<>>CPLAINT FOR CUSTODY 1. The Plaintiff iE; Dana M. Thompson, residing at 12675 Ridge Road, Chambersburg, F'):anklin County, Pennsylvania 17221. 2. The Defendant b ,John D. Thompson, residing at 720 North Hanover Street, Carlinle, Cumberland County, PennsylvanIa. 3. PlaIntiff seeks custody of the fallowing children: Nam~ Present Residence ~~ Sarah E, Thompson 720 North Hanover Street 3 D,0,8, 4/1/95 Carlisle, PA Brandy L, Thompson 720 North Hanover Street 6 D.O,B. 9/6/92 4, The children were not oorn out of wedlock. The children are presently in the posness:lon of the Defendant, John D, 'I'hompson, whose address is 720 North Hanover Street, Carlisle, ~ennsylvania, 5, The reiationship of the Defendant., ohildren is t.hat of natural father. resides w.it.h the following persons: John D, 'I'hompson, to the 1'he Defendant currently Sabrina Pastuszuk Sarah Thompson Brandy Thompson GIrlfriend Daughter Daughter 10, Plaintiff has no: part~cipated as 11 party In other litigation concerning the custody of these children in t.his court. Plaintiff has information of a Dustody proceeding concernIng the chJJ dren pending in a court of this Commonwealth, to wit: On or about Monday, January 11, 1999, the Law Office of IUchard C, Gaffney, filed an Emt!rgencji Peti tion For Custody, unknown docket number, and which resulted in an Order of Court, prohibi ting the children from being in the care of Jennifer Oberhouzer, the care provider for the minor children pending the completion of an investigation for possible abuse. On Wednesday, January 14, 1999, the Law Office of Ridlard ':. Gaffney, located in Carlisle, PA, filed 11 Petition ~)r CUHtody, unknown docket number, which contains terms for custody whIch are as yet unknown, but are believed not to include any temporary custody order for t.he minor chJ.ldren, This information was provided to counsel for the Plaintiff at approximat.ely 3:00 p,m. on Wednesday, ,January 13, 1999. Copies of said Orders and Petitions are not. ye'; ,.,ailable to the Plaintiff, hOlt'eVer, a significant. question with regard to improper venue is relevant. Plaintiff does not know of a person not a party to the proceedIngs who has physical custody of t.he children or claims to have custody or visitation rights with respect to the children. 11. The best interes'; and permanent welfare of the chUdren will be served by granting the relief requested because: 1, The Plaintif~ is the natural mother of the minor children, has an interest. in their welfare and upbringing, and wants to continue her parental relationship with the children. 2. The Defendarr: left the marit.al home on lO/9i9S, and has only had short visits wIth t,he children since that. Urns with the except. Ion of four independent overnight periods, 3, partial benefit The Plaintiff Is concerned that without a court ordered custody arrallqement., the children will suffer without the of having a relationship with their natural mother. 4, The Pla.l.ntiU .l.s concerned about the living arrangements of the Defendant, in that lw resides wlth a female companion, whose relationship hall only lasted two months, and which exposes the children to uncertainty, In addition, the girlfriend has made commments to the children that she is going to be tlwl r now "mommy" . 5, The Defendan: made arrangements with the Plaintiff to have an overnight Vislt with the children on Sunday, January 10, 1999 through Monday, ,Tanuary 11, 19<;9, The chIldren were to be returned to the PlainUff on the afternoon of January 11, 1999; however, the Defendant did not return the children and did not notify the Plaintiff os to the reason why he was not returlling the ch il dren. 6. informed bringing children On the evening of danuary 11, 1999, the Plaintiff was by the Defendant and his girlfriend that they were not the children back to her, but rather, any visits with the would have to be supervised by the Defendant, 7. The Defendan: further advised the Plaintiff that he was concerned about possible inappropriate behavior by the children's babysitter's son; but that no concerns were raised with regard to the Plaintiff. Despite this, he was not bringing the chl ldren back to their mother, He informed the Plaintiff that he had contacted the Pennsylvania State Police, Trooper David Peck, and had contacted Children and Youth Services. 8. Trooper Pec< was contacted on January 12, 1999 and indicated that there were no concerns with regard to the Plaintiff and that he had ad'lisf!d the D9fendant to work with the Pla.l.ntJ.ff in resolving any concerns that the Defendant had. 9. Children and Youth Services were contacted on January 12, 1999, Debra Pheil, and indicated that they were not investigating this matter as it was not within their jurisdiction. Debra Pheil also advised the Plaintiff that she was told by the Defendant that he was working with the Plaintiff with regard to the concerns he had wlth the children, 10. The Plainti!f has exercised primary custody of the two children since October 9, 1998 and has been the primary caretaker of the children since birth, providing for all their needs, including physical, emotional, and psychological needs. 11. The children have all of their belongings, includ.l.ng clothes, toys, etc. at the Plaintiffs home, in a single family residence, 12. The Plaintiff has never agreed to have the children stay with their father on 0 primary basis and the unilateral decision by the father to keep the children from their mother is not in their best .l.nterest and welfara. visitation and has maintained positive relationships with both B~andi and Sarah, 7. While Petitioner has no knowledge of any pending action for support or any Order of Court for support, Petitioner has consistently provided for Brandy and Sarah's support and well being by tendering $100.00 per week for their needs and expenses, 8. Respondent is currently employed at Grove Worldwide in Green Castle, PA and has a daily work schedule of 3 P,M. to 11 P.M, 9, DUring the periods of time of her daily employment, Respondent has placed Sarah and Brandy in the private care of Jenni fer O.1.berhe iser of Waynesboro, PA. 10. During recent periods of visitation with Brandy and Sarah, Petitioner has become aware of facts and circumstances that may portend sexual abuse of Sarah and possibly Brandy that occurred while in the custody of Respondent and in the care of Jennifer Olberheiser . 11, During this visit, Petitioner had a conversation with Sarah in which Sarah indicated a general discomfort with the care of Jennifer Olberheiser, When questioned further, Sarah described. incidents which Petitioner reasonably believes may involve sexual abuse and possibly child molestation by the .1.3 year old minor son of Jennifer Olberheiser, 12, Petitioner has discussed these incidents with the Respondent, 13, As of this date, due to her friendship with Ms. Olborheiser, tho Respondent is unwilling unable to take precautionary measures and remove the Brandy and 'Sarah from the daily care of Ms. Olberheiser, 14, Respondent is unwilling or unable to protect the health, safety, and well being of Sarah and Br.andy. 15. Petitioner has contacted the Pennsylvania State Police, Chambersburg Barracks and all investigation of potential criminal charges is now pending, 16, ~etitioner is able and willing to provide a stable home environment for Sarah and Brandy, 17. PeU t ioner is gainfully employed Roadway Express and curreritly maintains a two bedroom apartment in Carlisle, 18. It is in the best interests and well being of Brandy and Sarah Thompson that the Court intercede in this matter. 19. Petitioner now requests this Court to enter an order granting him temporary custody of Sarah and Brandy until the Pennsylvania State Police Investigation has concluded or hearing is scheduled in this matter. Petitioner further requests that this Court order that any visits with Respondent be supervised until this matter is resolved. 20, It is in the best interests and well being of Brandy and Sarah Thompson that such an order be entered. 6, PA,R,C,P. 19l5.2 providfls that the county where tho children have resided the lust six months is the proper venue to bring a custody action, .,. PA,R.C, p, 1915.2 (2) also provides that other factors can be considered in showing that H, is in the boset interest of the child because the children and his parents have a significant connection with the county and thero is available within the county substantial evidence concerning the child's present or future care, protection, tndning, and personal relationships. In the case at hand, the following significant contacts in Franklin County exist: A, the minor children have been residents of Franklin County since 1994. B. The Pc icioner, who is and has been the primary caretaker of the minor children, has been a resident of Franklin County since 1994, c, rhe Respondent was a resident of Franklin County until approximately November, 1998. D. The Respondent has not been the primary caretaker of the mlnoI' chilcren, the subject of this action, and therefore, the cccurrence out of which this cause of action arose was not Cumberland County, E, The Respondent removed the children from Franklin County without the Petitioners knowledge or permission and has been in possession of the children for venue purpcses for only three days. F, The minor child, Brandy Thompson, attends school in Greencastle-Antrim School District, which is in Franklin County, G, The minor children have relatives in Franklin County. No relatives are in Cumberland County, 8, A concili,ati,m hearing has been scheduled for January 21, 1999 at 10:00 a.m. in Cumberland County. 9, The concili.u':ion is premature as Preliminary Objections have been filed in the instant matter in the nature of a Motion To Dismiss for Lack of Venue, WHEREFORE, the Petitioner respectfu.11y requests that the Complaint in Custody ~iled by the Respondent be dismissed or, in the al.ternatlve, that the Conciliation conference scheduled for ~ '0 ~, "I '~:: .. " Cl' W 1I5~::: r'co ::~i; fr' ~)( in (' -dd~ ('-J It! 1\' c:~ ' ;H1J T ,ll:(: (,!~!fL 1-' :L: , u_ cr~ :j 0 (J~ ()