Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-6033Richard P. Mislitsky, Plaintiff Judith Kuntz-Mislitski, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY/VISITATION COMPLAINT FOR CUSTODY AND NOW comes the above-captioned Plaintiff, Richard P. Mislitsky, by and through his attorney, Carol A. Redding, Esquire, and sets for the following Complaint For Custody: 1. The Plaintiff is Richard P. Mislitsky, residing at 222 Pine Road, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. The Defendant is Judith Kuntz-Mislitski, residing at 222 Pine Road, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. Plaintiff seeks custody of the following children: Kristen Brielle Mislitski 222 Pine Road Carlisle, PA 16 years Alexa Ann Mislitski 222 Pine Road Carlisle, PA 12 years The children were not born out of wedlock. The children are presently in the custody of the Plaintiff and Defendant, who both reside at 222 Pine Road, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. During the past five years, the children have resided with the following persons and at the following addresses: Richard P. Mislitsky 222 Pine Road 1996 through Judith Kuntz-Mislitski Carlisle, PA Present The mother of the children is Judith Kuntz-Mislitski, currently residing at 222 Pine Road, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. She is married to the Plaintiff, Richard P. Mislitsky. The father of the children is Richard P. Mislitsky, currently residing at 222 Pine Road, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. He is married to the Defendant, Judith Kuntz-Mislitski. 4. The relationship of the Plaintiff to the children is that of natural father. The Plaintiff currently resides with the following persons: Judith Kuntz-Mislitski Kristen Brielle Mislitski Alexa Ann Mislitski Wife Daughter Daughter 5. The relationship of the Defendant to the children is that of natural mother. The Defendant currently reides with the following persons: Richard P. Mislitsky Kristen Brielle Misliitski Alexa Ann Mislitski Husband Daughter Daughter 6. Plaintiff has not participated as a party or witness, or in another capacity, in other litigation concerning the custody of the children in this or another court. Plaintiff has no information of a custody proceeding concerning the children pending in a court of this Commonwealth or any other state. Plaintiff does not know or a person not a party to the proceedings who have physical custody of the child or claims to have custody or visitation rights with respect to the children. 7. The best interest and permanent welfare of the children will be served by granting the relief requested because: so Mother and Father are currently residing together at the marital residence where they have lived with the children for many years. The children have their own rooms and their do personal belongings are also at the marital residence. The Plaintiff has participated in all of the care and upbringin9 of his children, includin9 but not limited to their physical, emotional, educational, and psychological welfare, for example: i. Providing food, shelter, and clothing and financial stability ii. iii. iv. Vo vi. vii. viii. Providing transportation of the children to school Taking the children to various sporting events Taking the children to doctors/dentists/etc, appointments Father coached the children's soccer teams over the past several years Father prepares breakfast and often prepares dinner for the children Father assists with the children's homework and other school projects Father has accompanied the children on trips, vacations, has participated in educational activities, and has made himself available for the day to day lives of his children. The Plaintiff is the natural father of the children, has an interest in their welfare and upbringing, and want to continue to develop his relationship with the children. On or about Monday, October 1, 2001, at a hearing before the Honorable Judge Bailey, counsel for the Plaintiff advised the Court that custody would be a contested issue in the divorce matter. In light of the contested custody issue, on or about Monday, October 1, 2001, Plaintiffs counsel, Carol A. Redding, spoke with Defendant's counsel, Kathleen Daley about the possibility of mediation to resolve the contested issues of custody. Correspondence has subsequently been sent by Defendant's counsel suggesting mediators to be utilized and questioning how quickly it could be accomplished. On or about Friday, October 19, 2001, the Plaintiff received a copy of a Domestic Relations Order scheduling a hearing for November 9, 2001 for the purpose of hearing issues of various issues, including child support. In said Petition, Defendant listed the parties separation date as October 31, 2001. The Defendant further listed the children's addresses as 18 Liberty Court, Carlisle, Pennsylvania and listed the Defendant at this same address. Neither the children nor the Defendant reside at this residence. A copy of said Order and Petition is attached hereto, made a part hereof, and marked Exhibit At no time has the Plaintiff agreed that Defendant would take the children with her at any time that she might move from the marital residence. In fact, Plaintiff has given Defendant notice through his counsel, that he specifically disagrees with Defendant taking the children and was contesting custody. Until receiving the aforementioned Domestic Relations Order, the Plaintiff had no information concerning the intended residence of the Defendant, has no knowledge of its suitability, and no information has been given to the Plaintiff concerning schedules for custody. The Defendant believes and therefore avers that the Defendant intends to vacate the marital residence on October 31, 2001 and that the Defendant intends to take the children with her without regard to Plaintiffs custodial rights and without any schedule implemented to secure Plaintiff's custodial rights. Father is self-employed and has a flexible work schedule such that he can be available to care for the children at any time, especially on a shared custody schedule. Father often works at home and would continue to do so during those times when he has physical custody of the children. ko Mother is a full-time teacher with a work schedule of approximately 7:30 a.m. through 3:30 p.m. Her schedule is not flexible such that she may leave her work at any time. The children love their father and need to have maximum contact with their father and his family in order to facilitate family ties. mo The Plaintiff believes that the minor children should have shared time with their natural parents until a permanent agreement can be arrived at between the parties. The Plaintiff can provide stable home and living custody periods. the children with a environment during Without the benefit of a court ordered custody schedule, Plaintiff believes that the Defendant intends to proceed in a course of action that will limit his time with the children, which is not in their best interest and welfare. For all the above reasons, shared custody with the parents is in the best interest and welfare of the children and it is proposed that the most effective schedule will be a week on/week off schedule. 8. Each parent whose parental rights to the children have not been terminated and the person who has physical custody of the children have been named as parties to this action. W~EREFORE, Plaintiff requests the Court to maintain the status quo which has existed since the children's birth and continues to this date by granting shared custody of the children to the Plaintiff and Defendant. Respectfully submitted, Carol A. Redding, Esquire Counsel for the Plaintiff Richard P. Mislitsky REDDING LAW OFFICE 19 North Main Street Chambersburg, Pennsylvania 717-267-1440 Attorney No: 82041 17201 I verify that the statements in this Petition are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. DATE: I~D-1~5~- ~l ..... , ' Richard P. Mislitski EXHIBIT "A" JUDITH KUNTZ-MISLITSKI, Plaintiff/Petitioner VS. RICHARD P. MISLITSKY, Defendant/Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - DIVORCE NO. 2001-4676 CIVIL TERM IN DIVORCE DR# 31093 Pacses# 865103901 ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 17th day of October, 2001, upon consideration of the attached Petition for Alimony Pendente Lite and/or counsel fees, it is hereby directed that the parties and their respective counsel appear before R.J. Shadday on November 9t 2001 at 9:00A.M. for a conference, at 13 N. Hanover St., Carlisle, PA 17013, after which the conference officer may recommend that an Order for Alimony Pendente Lite be entered. YOU are further ordered to bring to the conference: (1) a true copy of your most recent Federal Income Tax Return, including W-2's as filed (2) your pay stubs for the preceding six (6) months (3) the Income and Expense Statement at~ached to this order, completed as required by Rule 1910.11© (4) verification of child care expenses (5) proof of medical coverage which you may have, or may have available to you IF you fail to appear for the conference or bring the required documents, the Court may issue a wammt for your arrest. BY THE COURT, George E. HotTer, President Judge Mail copies on Petitioner 10-17-01 to: < Respondent Kathleen Daley, Esquire Carol Redding, Esquire Date of Order: October 17, 2001 YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO A LAWYER, WHO MAY A~E~hD~d~Y~ ~°~eE;;~N~D REPRESENT YOU. 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 MAY GET LEGAL HELP. CUMBERLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 2 LIBERTY AVE. CARLISLE, PENNSYLVANIA 17013 (717) 249-3166 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JUDITH KUNTZ-MISLITSKI, Plaintiff RICHARD P. MISLITSKY, Defendant : Docket Number: c~/- : PACSES Case Number: : Other State ~ Number: A0plication for Alimony Pendente Lite and Child Support Services Name of applicant: Judith Kuntz-Mislitski Social Security Number (SSN): 141-38-5347 Name of other party: Richard P. Mislitsky I request alimony pendete lite and child support services from the Cumberland County Domestic Relations Section, including medical insurance, and an allocation for non-reimbursed medical expenses for both myself and my children. lieant Signature /~ FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date received in DRS Date AFDC NON-AFDC IV-E IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JUDITH KUNTZ-MISLITSKI, Plaintiff RICHARD P. MISLITSKY, Defendant Docket Number: PACSES Case Number: Other State ID Number: Comnlaint for Support 1. Plaintiff.resides at: 18 Liberty Court, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17013. Plaintiff's Social Security Number is 141-38-5347 and date of birth is August 23, 1956. 2. Defendant resides at: 222 Pine Road, Mount Holly Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17065. Defendant's Social Security Number is 184-44-7198, and date of birth is March 11, 1953. 3. (a) Plaintiff.and Defendant were married on September 4, 1983, in Colonia, Middlesex County, New Jersey. (b) Plaintiffand Defendant were separated on October 31, 2001. (c) Plaintiffand Defendant are in the process of divorcing, with Defendant having filed a complaint in divorce on August 1, 2001, at Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas docket number 01-4676 Civil. 4. Plaintiffand Defendant are the parents of the following children: Name Birth Date Age Born of the Marriage Kristen Brielle Mislitski May 25, 1985 16 years Yes Residence: 18 Liberty Court, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. Alexa Ann Mislitski November 2, 1988 12 years Yes Residence: 18 Liberty Court, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 5. Plaintiff seeks child support and alimony pendente lite services for the following persons: Judith Kuntz-Mislitski, Kristen Brielle Mislitski, and Alexa Ann Mislitski. 6. (a) PlaintifflS NOT receiving public assistance (b) Plaintiff is employed, full-time, with the Big Spring School District, as a teacher. Her gross annual salary is approximately $30,000.00. 7. No prior support orders were entered against the Defendant in an action of support for: Judith Kuntz-Mislitski, Kristen Brielle Mislitski, and/or Alexa Ann Mislitski. 8. Plaintiff has received no direct support payments from the Defendant. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffrequests that an order be entered against Defendant and in favor of the Plaintiff' and the aforementioned children for child support, alimony pendente lite, medical coverage, and an allocation for non-reimbursed medical expenses. I verify that the statements made in this Complaint are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. lai~tiff Date Richard P. Mislitsky, : Plaintiff : Judith Kuntz-Mislitski, : Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY/VISITATION NO. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Carol A. Redding, Esquire, hereby certify that on October 22, 2001, I served a tree and correct copy of the foregoing Complaint for Custody and Corresponding Orders, by first class mail, postage pre-paid, and by facsimile (717-657-4996) on Counsel for Defendant, to the following addresses: Kathleen Carey Daley, Esquire DALEY LAW OFFICES 1029 Scenery Drive Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17109 Carol A. Redding, Esquire Counsel for Plaintiff Richard P. Mislitsky RICHARD P, MISLITSKY, PLAINTIFF : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JUDITH KUNTZ-MISLITSKI, DEFENDANT · 01-6033 CIVIL TERM AND NOW, this -'-~.O..-~ day of October, 2001, the petition for an emergency order regarding children ages 16 and 12, IS DENIED. The complaint in custody is referred to conciliation. Kathleen Carey Daley, Esquire For Plaintiff Edgar B. Bayleyf. Carol A. Redding, Esquire For Defendant Court Administrator j :sea RICHARD P. MISLITSKY : PLAiNTIFF V. : 01-6033 JUDITH KUNTZ-MISLITSKI DEFENDANT : IN CUSTODY IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COLrNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION LAW AND NOW, Tuesday, October 30, 2001 , upon consideration of the attached Complaint, it is hereby directed that parties and their respective counsel appear before Jaequeline M. Verney, Esq. , the conciliator, at 4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle on Wednesday, November 28, 2001 at 1:30 PM for a Pre-Hearing Custody Conference. At such conference, an effort will be made to resolve the issues in dispute; or if this cannot be accomplished, to define and narrow the issues to be heard by the court, and to enter into a temporary order. All children age five or older may also be present at the conference. Failure to appear at the conference may provide grounds for entry of a temporary or permanent order. The court hereby directs the parties to furnish any and all existing Protection from Abuse orders, Special Relief orders, and Custody orders to the conciliator 48 hours prior to scheduled hearing. FOR THE COURT, By: /si Jacqueline M. Verney. Esq. Custody Conciliator kJ The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County is required by law to comply with the Americans with Disabilites Act of 1990. For information about accessible facilities and reasonable accommodations available to disabled individuals having business before the court, please contact our office. All arrangements must be made at least 72 hours prior to any hearing or business before the court. You must attend the scheduled conference or hearing. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR ATTORNEY AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE AN ATTORNEY OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Telephone (717) 249-3166 NOV e 8 001 RICHARD P. MISLITSKY, Plaintiff V. JUDITH KUNTZ-MISLITSKI, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : : NO. 2001-6033 CIVIL TERM : : IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this /O'0- day of ~ ,2001, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows: 1. A Hearing is scheduled in Court Rgom No. ~ , of the Cumberland _C,o_unty Co ~urt House, on the ~/9' day of ,,~~, 2002, at 37: ~'J" o clock, /q. M., at which time testimony will be taken. FoP'purposes oft~ng, the Father shall be deemed to be the moving party and shall proceed initially with testimony. Counsel for each party shall file with the Court and opposing counsel a Memorandum setting forth each party's position on custody, a list of witnesses who will be expected to testify at the Hearing and a summary of the anticipated testimony of each witness. These Memoranda shall be filed at least ten days prior to the Hearing date. 2. Pending further Order of Court or agreement of the parties, the following shall remain in effect: 3. The Father, Richard P. Mislitsky, and the Mother, Judith Kuntz-Mislitski shall have shared legal custody of Kristen Brielle Mislitski, born May 25, 1985 and Alexa Ann Mislitski, bom November 2, 1988. Each parent shall have an equal fight, to be exercised jointly with the other parent, to make all major non-emergency decisions affecting the children's general well-being including, but not limited to, all decisions regarding their health, education and religion. 4. Mother shall have primary physical custody of the children. 5. Father shall have the following periods of partial physical custody of the children beginning December 6, 2001: A. On an altemating week schedule, Thursdays from after school to the following Tuesday morning and Wednesday from after school to Thursday morning. B. Christmas Eve for the entire day until the family celebration is concluded in the evening. C. Such other times as the parties agree. 6. Transportation shall be as agreed by the parties. 7. The parties agree to participate in family counseling. 8. The parties shall have liberal telephone contact with the children. 9. The parties may modify this Order by mutual agreement. In the absence of mutual consent, the terms of this Order shall control. Edgar B. Bayley, cc: Carol A. Redding, Esquire, counsel for Father Kathleen Carey Daley, Esquire, counsel for Mother RICHARD P. MISLITSKY, Plaintiff V. JUDITH KUNTZ-MISLITSKI, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : : NO. 2001-6033 CIVIL TERM : : IN CUSTODY PRIOR JUDGE: EDGAR B. BAYLEY CUSTODY CONCILIATION SUMMARY REPORT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CUMBERLAND COUNTY RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1915.3-8, the undersigned Custody Conciliator submits the following report: 1. The pertinent information concerning the Children who are the subjects of this litigation is as follows: NAME DATE OF BIRTH CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF Kristen Brielle Mislitski Alexa Ann Mislitski May 25, 1985 November 2, 1988 Mother Mother 2. A Conciliation Conference was held November 28, 2001 with the following individuals in attendance: The Father, Richard P. Mislitsky, with his counsel, Carol A. Redding, Esquire, and the Mother, Judith Kuntz-Mislitski, with her counsel, Kathleen Carey Daley, Esquire. 3. The Court previously entered an Order on October 22, 2001 denying Father's Petition for Emergency Relief. 4. Father's position on custody is as follows: Father seeks shared legal and physical custody on a week on/week off basis. Father maintains that he has a close relationship with the children, has been active in all facets of the children's care and nurturing. He fears that if he does not have shared physical custody, he will lose the close relationship he presently has due to the children's active lives. The parties live in close proximity and Father believes a shared physical custody arrangement would not be disruptive to the children. 5. Mother's position on custody is as follows: Mother seeks shared legal custody and primary physical custody with Father having an alternating weekend schedule and daily access to the children. Mother maintains that a week on/week off arrangement would be disruptive to the children, that the children need the sense of a home base. Mother further maintains that the older child who is sixteen years old has indicated a preference to live primarily with Mother with frequent overnights with Father. 6. The Conciliator recommends an Order in the form as attached scheduling a Hearing and granting the parents shared legal custody, Mother primary physical custody and Father having six (6) overnights out of fourteen (14). It is expected that the Hearing will require one day. Date Esquire Custody Conciliator RICHARD MISLITSKY, PLAINTIFF : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JUDITH MISLITSKI, DEFENDANT : 01-6033 CIVIL TERM day of February, 2002, IT IS ORDERED: AND NOW, this ~-"~" (1) The temporary order of December 10, 2001, IS VACATED. (2) Richard Mislitsky and Judith Mislitski shall have shared legal custody of Kristen Mislitski, born May 26, 1985, and Alexa Mislitski, born November 2, 1988. (3) Richard Mislitsky and Judith Mislitski shall have shared physical custody of Kristen and Alexa on an alternate week schedule, with a transfer each Sunday at 7:00 (4) Each summer the parents shall arrange a three-week continuous period in which the children are with each parent. (5) The parents shall make special arrangements for school holidays with the best interest of the children in mind. 01-6033 CIVIL TERM Carol Redding, Esquire For Plaintiff Kathleen C. Daley, Esquire For Defendant :saa RICHARD MISLITSKY, PLAINTIFF : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA JUDITH MISLITSKI, DEFENDANT : 01-6033 CIVIL TERM OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT Bayley, J., February 22, 2002:-- Richard Mislitsky, age 48, and Judith Mislitski, age 46, are the parents of Kristen Mislitski, age 16, born May 26, 1985, and Alexa Mislitski, age 13, born November 2, 1988. This is a first marriage for both parents. They separated at Thanksgiving 2001. The mother moved to a two-bedroom condominium in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, about three miles from the four bedroom marital house in Mt. Holly Springs, Pennsylvania, where the father remained. Both homes are in the South Middleton School District where Kristen is a junior in high school and Alexa is in seventh grade. The father, an attorney for twenty-two years, is a solo practitioner in Carlisle. The mother is a high school art teacher in the South Middleton School District. She did not work outside of the home for five years after Alexa was born. She started substitute teaching four to five years ago and has been a full-time teacher for three years. For the upcoming 2002 summer vacation period she plans to take at least one graduate course toward her permanent teaching certification, weekdays from 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. 01-6033 CIVIL TERM On December 10, 2001, an interim order was entered following conciliation, whereby the father had his daughters in alternate weeks, Thursdays from after school to the following Tuesday morning, and Wednesday from after school to Thursday morning. A custody hearing was scheduled for February 21, 2002. Shortly after Christmas, the parents, for the convenience of themselves and the children, privately altered the temporary schedule so that the father has the children for a continuous period of six days out of every fourteen. The transfer day is a Thursday after school. The custody hearing was conducted on February 21st. These intelligent and able parents have raised two good, bright, sociable, well- adjusted daughters. The mutual love between the children and their parents is apparent. Both girls are in good health although Kristen suffers from some headaches. After diagnostic tests, her physician believes that the primary problem is stress. The frequency of the headaches had recently decreased. Both girls do well in school. Both have chores in the homes of each parent. Both present no significant disciplinary problems to either parent. Neither child perceives that they are having any serious difficulties. Each parent acknowledges that the other is a good parent, although the mother appears to have a more relaxed relationship with the girls. Both parents are actively engaged in all aspects of their daughters' lives. Kristen drives back and forth to her high school. ^lexa either is driven to school or uses a school bus. Both girls like athletics, and their father has coached some of their teams. This spring both will be playing soccer. Their practices will be after school -2- 01-6033 CIVIL TERM and last to approximately 5:30 p.m. When there is a game it will last to approximately 7:00 p.m. The father seeks shared alternate week custody with transfers on Sunday, although the current schedule is acceptable to him. The mother believes that ideally she should have primary physical custody, with the father having the children on alternate weekends and additional flexible times, although the current schedule is acceptable to her with a change requested by the children. That change being on school nights when they are now at the father's home, that they be allowed to return late in the evening to their mother's home before going to school the next day. The mother is willing to try this arrangement even though she does not believe it is ideal. The father is opposed. The children expressed their desire in chambers. Kristen said: A I think it's a hassle .... I like spending time with my dad and my mom, but I don't like to move every week. Like, that's the main problem that I'm having because I have to move on - like, I have to move every week. Like, my dad tried to say - like, tried to have the same stuff in both houses but, like, I don't know, like - but I guess it's not possible for me. You can't duplicate pictures and pictures frames. Well you can duplicate pictures. You need to have one home base place, you know, and I don't have that. I have two, my mom and my dad's house, and I don't like that. Q Would you rather have one? A Yeah, I want to have one, like, I can keep all my stuff at and I don't have to move as much. That's why I wanted this new plan. Q What would you get by going back to the house at night and then going to school the next day as far as not moving stuff? How are you saying - A I'll get ready and stuff at my mom's house and then, like, I -3- 01-6033 CIVIL TERM will have to probably take a pair of shorts and soccer stuff and then I'll just go right to my dad's house so I don't have to pack anything, you know what I mean. Q stay? A Alexa said: And then at the end of the night go back to your mom's and Yeah. A Yes, I want to change it. It's okay, but I hate packing my stuff up for, like, six days in a row and just, like, going there because I don't really - it's not that bad but most of all, like, it confuses my friends and everything, like, they don't know where I am when they want to find me or something so it's kind of hard. Q So it is the packing up and back and forth? A Yeah. Suffice it to say, both of these delightful girls are classic American teenagers. A custody order must be in the best interests of the children, and is to be premised upon consideration of all factors that legitimately affect the children's physical, intellectual, moral and spiritual well-being. Alfred v. Braxton, 442 Pa. Super. 381 (1995). The preference of a child in a custody case, although not controlling, is a factor to be considered as long as it is based on good reasons. EAL v. LJW, 662 A.2d 1109 (Pa. Super. 1995). In considering a preference, a child's maturity and intelligence must be considered. Commonwealth ex tel. Pierce v. Pierce, 493 Pa. 292 (1981). In In re: Wesley J.K., 299 Pa. Super. 504 (1982), the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, stated that both parents must be fit and capable of making mature child-rearing decisions, they must be willing to provide care and love for their children, they must express a desire for the continued active involvement in their children's lives, that the children must -4- 01-6033 CIVIL TERM recognize both parents as sources of love and security, and that a minimal degree of cooperation between the parents is necessary in order to award shared custody. All of the elements in support of a shared custody order are present in this case. VVhile shared custody presents some inconveniences for children, as any custody order does, it provides a viable means of maintaining a strong, loving relationship with both parents. Here, there are two good parents and two good daughters. There is stability in both homes. The parents live three miles apart in the same school district. The parents are capable of communicating with each other in the best interests of their children,~ and both have the best interests of their children at heart. The disruption to the children arises in their going back and forth between their parents' homes, despite the fact that the father has clothing for them in his home, and is exacerbated under the current schedule in which the transfer day is a school day. It would be more seriously exacerbated by their impractical solution to return to their mother's home, late on school nights, when they are at their father's home. It makes much more sense to have the transfer on a weekend with an alternate week schedule. This arrangement is in the best interest of each child as it should provide more stability for them in the home of each parent. For the foregoing reasons, the following order is entered. ~ Nonetheless, the father should take a heartfelt lesson from the testimony of his wife as to how their communication is affected when she does not agree with him, or he does not immediately get what he wants. -5- 01-6033 CIVIL TERM AND NOW, this ~;~- day of February, 2002, IT IS ORDERED: (1) The temporary order of December 10, 2001, IS VACATED. (2) Richard Mislitsky and Judith Mislitski shall have shared legal custody of Kristen Mislitski, born May 26, 1985, and Alexa Mislitski, born November 2, 1988. (3) Richard Mislitsky and Judith Mislitski shall have shared physical custody of Kristen and Alexa on an alternate week schedule, with a transfer each Sunday at 7:00 (4) Each summer the parents shall arrange a three-week continuous period in which the children are with each parent. (5) The parents shall make special arrangements for school holidays with the best interest of the children in mind. i~ B~~.J Carol Redding, Esquire For Plaintiff Kathleen C. Daley, Esquire For Defendant :saa -6- RICHARD MISLITSKY, Plaintiff JUDITH MISLITSKI, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : : NO. 01-6033 CIVIL TERM : : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : IN CUSTODY PRAECIPE FOR ENTRY OF APPEARANCE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please emer the appearance of John J. Connelly, Jr., Esquire on behalf of the Defendant, Judith Kuntz-Mislitski, in the above-captioned action. Date: Hershey, PA 17033 (717) 533-3280 PA I.D. No. 15615