HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-4437The mother of the child is Lauren M. Oeser. She currently resides at 85 R.
East Ave. Everett, Bedford County, Pennsylvania. She is married to Kevin M. Oeser.
The father of the child is Kevin M. Oeser. He currently resides at 305 Ross Ave.,
Apt. C., New Cumberland, Pennsylvania, 17070. He is married to Lauren M. Oeser.
4. The relationship of plaintiff to the child is that of Father. The plaintiff currently
resides with the child and paternal grandmother.
5. The relationship of defendant to the child is that of Mother. The defendant
currently lives with the child.
6. Plaintiff has not participated as a party or witness, or in another capacity, in
other litigation concerning the custody of the child in this or another court.
Plaintiff has no information of a custody proceeding concerning the child
pending in a court of this Commonwealth or any other state.
Plaintiff does not know of a person not a party to the proceedings who has
physical custody of the child or claims to have custody or visitation rights with respect to
the child.
7. The best interest and permanent welfare of the child will be served by granting
the relief requested because: -The parties separated in May 2008 Father is seeking
shared legal custody, primary physical custody and a custody order which would define the
parties' periods of physical custody. This request is the in the best interest of the child
because it would provide stability for the child
8. Each parent whose parental rights to the child have not been terminated and
the person who has physical custody of the child has been named as parties to this
action.
child. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests the court to enter a custody order regarding the
Date: a a S
Respectfully submitted,
ne Adams, Esquire
No. 79465
7 W. South St.
Carlisle, Pa. 17013
(717) 245-8508
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
VERIFICATION
I verify that the statements made in this Custody Complaint are true and correct.
I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penaities of 18
Pa.C.S. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
Date:
,::?Ooe . C-,)?
Kevin M. Oeser, Plaintiff
ICY l
f ff E ..+.e "?:,
7V ?
W O
V
b
KEVIN M. OESER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
2008-4437 CIVIL ACTION LAW
LAUREN M. OESER IN CUSTODY
DEFENDANT
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, Wednesday, July 30, 2008 upon consideration of the attached Complaint,
it is hereby directed that parties and their respective counsel appear before Dawn S. Sunday, Esq. , the conciliator,
at 39 West Main Street, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 on Tuesday, September 02, 2008 at 10:00 AM
for a Pre-Hearing Custody Conference. At such conference, an effort will be made to resolve the issues in dispute; or
if this cannot be accomplished, to define and narrow the issues to be heard by the court, and to enter into a temporary
order. 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/ Dawn S. Sunda Es .
Custody Conciliator
The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County is required by law to comply with the Americans
with Disabilites Act of 1990. For information about accessible facilities and reasonable accommodations
available to disabled individuals having business before the court, please contact our office. All arrangements
must be made at least 72 hours prior to any hearing or business before the court. You must attend the scheduled
conference or hearing.
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR ATTORNEY AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT
HAVE AN ATTORNEY OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET
FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP.
Cumberland County Bar Association
32 South Bedford Street
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
Telephone (717) 249-3166
C-4
6°1 :? PJ 14 ?iTr ?l G0Z
+? ...: ......:..r-?? III
rF P 0 81 (p
KEVIN M. OESER
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
VS.
LAUREN M. OESER
Defendant
08-4437 CIVIL ACTION LAW
IN CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 16 day of , 2008, upon _ 5?O/? consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows:
1. The Father, Kevin M. Oeser, and the Mother, Lauren M. Oeser, shall have shared legal
custody of Harlee J. Oeser, born July 16, 2006. Major decisions concerning the Child including, but
not necessarily limited to, her health, welfare, education, religious training and upbringing shall be
made jointly by the parties after discussion and consultation with a view toward obtaining and
following a harmonious policy in the Child's best interest. Neither party shall impair the other party's
rights to shared legal custody of the Child. Neither party shall attempt to alienate the affections of the
Child from the other party. Each party shall notify the other of any activity or circumstance
concerning the Child that could reasonably be expected to be of concern to the other. Day to day
decisions shall be the responsibility of the parent then having physical custody. With regard to any
emergency decisions which must be made, the parent having physical custody of the Child at the time
of the emergency shall be permitted to make any immediate decisions necessitated thereby. However,
that parent shall inform the other of the emergency and consult with him or her as soon as possible. In
accordance with 23 Pa.C.S.A. §5309, each party shall be entitled to complete and full information from
any doctor, dentist, teacher, professional or authority and to have copies of any reports or information
given to either party as a parent as authorized by statute.
2. Pending the custody conciliation conference scheduled in this Order, the parties shall share
having physical custody of the Child on an alternating weekly basis with the exchange to take place
each week on Sunday at 6:00 p.m.
3. Unless otherwise agreed between the parties, the parties shall exchange custody at the Wal-
Mart store in Bedford, Pennsylvania.
4. Neither party shall remove the Child from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania without
notifying the other parent in advance and providing the other parent with the address and telephone
number where the Child can be contacted.
5. As soon as practicable, the Father shall provide the Mother with copies of the Child's birth
certificate, medical insurance card and information and the Child's social security number. The parties
shall exchange all prescribed medications for the Child during exchanges of custody and the parent
3
relinquishing custody shall provide any instructions with regard to the administration of the medication
and the information concerning the Child's health during the preceding period of custody.
6. The parties and their respective counsel shall appear for a custody conciliation conference in
the office of the conciliator, Dawn S. Sunday, on October 21, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. for the purpose of
reviewing the custodial arrangements after the Mother has had an opportunity to obtain legal counsel.
7. Neither party shall do or say anything which may estrange the Child from the other parent,
injure the opinion of the Child as to the other parent, or hamper the free and natural development of the
Child's love and respect for the other parent. Both parties shall ensure that third parties having contact
with the Child comply with this provision.
8. Neither party shall use controlled substances or consume alcohol to excess during periods of
custody with the Child.
9. This Order is entered pursuant to an agreement of the parties at a custody conciliation
conference. The parties may modify the provisions of this Order by mutual consent. In the absence of
mutual consent, the terms of this Order shall control.
J.
cc: " Jae Adams, Esquire - Counsel for Father
? Lauren M. Oeser - Mother
1
9?i??o8
I a18 01
r' a '?ul
•
KEVIN M. OESER
Plaintiff
vs.
LAUREN M. OESER
Defendant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
08-4437 CIVIL ACTION LAW
IN CUSTODY
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 Child who is the subject of this litigation is as
follows:
NAME DATE OF BIRTH CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF
Harlee J. Oeser July 16, 2006 Mother/Father
2. A custody conciliation conference was held on September 2, 2008, with the following
individuals in attendance: the Father, Kevin M. Oeser, with his counsel, Jane Adams, Esquire, and the
Mother, Lauren M. Oeser, who is not represented by counsel in this matter.
3. The parties agreed to entry of an Order in the form as attached.
Oct
Date Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire
Custody Conciliator
OCT 17 Zoo8
KEVIN M. OESER
Plaintiff
vs.
LAUREN M. OESER
Defendant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
08-4437
CIVIL ACTION LAW
IN CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT
1AND NOW, this C day of 0 G??? U?1 2008, upon
consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows:
1. The prior Order of this Court dated September 10, 2008 is vacated and replaced with this
Order.
2. The Father, Kevin M. Oeser, and the Mother, Lauren M. Oeser, shall have shared legal
custody of Harlee J. Oeser, born July 16, 2006. Major decisions concerning the Child including, but
not necessarily limited to, her health, welfare, education, religious training and upbringing shall be
made jointly by the parties after discussion and consultation with a view toward obtaining and
following a harmonious policy in the Child's best interest. Neither party shall impair the other party's
rights to shared legal custody of the Child. Neither party shall attempt to alienate the affections of the
Child from the other party. Each party shall notify the other of any activity or circumstance
concerning the Child that could reasonably be expected to be of concern to the other. Day to day
decisions shall be the responsibility of the parent then having physical custody. With regard to any
emergency decisions which must be made, the parent having physical custody of the Child at the time
of the emergency shall be permitted to make any immediate decisions necessitated thereby. However,
that parent shall inform the other of the emergency and consult with him or her as soon as possible. In
accordance with 23 Pa.C.S.A. §5309, each party shall be entitled to complete and full information from
any doctor, dentist, teacher, professional or authority and to have copies of any reports or information
given to either party as a parent as authorized by statute.
3. The parties shall share having physical custody of the Child on an alternating weekly basis
with the exchange to take place every week on Sunday at 6:00 p.m.
4. Unless otherwise agreed between the parties, the parties shall exchange custody at the Wal-
Mart store in Bedford, Pennsylvania.
5. Neither party shall remove the Child from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania without
notifying the other parent in advance and providing the other parent with the address and telephone
number where the Child can be contacted.
6. Within ten (10) days of the date of this Order, the Father shall provide to the Mother copies
of the Child's Birth Certificate and the Child's Social Security Number. The Father shall also provide
the Mother with a copy of the Child's medical insurance card as soon as it becomes available. The
parties shall exchange all prescribed medications for the Child during exchanges of custody and the
parent relinquishing custody shall provide any instructions with regard to the administration of the
medication and the information concerning the Child's health during the preceding period of custody.
7. The parties shall share having custody of the Child on holidays as follows:
A. Christmas: For the Christmas holiday in 2008, the Mother shall have custody of the
Child from December 14 at the regular time of exchange through Christmas Day at 2:00 p.m. and the
Father shall have custody from Christmas Day at 2:00 p.m. through January 4 at the regular exchange
time. The Mother shall have custody of the Child beginning on January 4 for her regular alternating
week and the parties shall continue to alternate thereafter. In future years, the parties shall share
having custody of the Child over Christmas with the Mother having Christmas Eve through Christmas
Day at 2:00 p.m. and the Father having Christmas Day at 2:00 p.m. through New Year's with
adjustments to the schedule to ensure that the parties have substantially equal periods of time with the
Child before returning to the alternating weekly schedule.
B. Thanksgiving: The Father shall have custody of the Child for the entire week (from
Sunday through Sunday), which includes Thanksgiving Day in even-numbered years and the Mother
shall have custody of the Child for the same time period in odd-numbered years. In the event either
party's period of Thanksgiving custody falls during the other party's regular alternating week of
custody, the parties shall exchange weeks for Thanksgiving week and the immediately following week
and thereafter shall resume the alternating weekly schedule.
C. Mother's Day/Father's Day: In every year, the Mother shall have custody of the
Child for Mother's Day and the Father shall have custody of the Child for Father's Day. In the event
the holiday falls on the other party's weekly period of custody, the parties shall exchange custody of
the Child on the holiday in the morning at a time to be arranged by agreement rather than at 6:00 p.m.
D. The parties shall make arrangements for custody of the Child over the remaining
holidays by agreement.
E. The holiday custody schedule shall supersede and take precedence over the regular
custody schedule.
8. Neither party shall do or say anything which may estrange the Child from the other parent,
injure the opinion of the Child as to the other parent, or hamper the free and natural development of the
Child's love and respect for the other parent. Both parties shall ensure that third parties having contact
with the Child comply with this provision.
9. Neither party shall use controlled substances or consume alcohol to excess during periods of
custody with the Child. Both parties shall ensure that third parties having contact with the Child
during his or her period of custody comply with this provision.
10. Neither party shall take the Child into a bar or the bar area of a restaurant. This provision
is not intended to prohibit the parties from having a meal with the Child in the dining area of a
restaurant which has a bar in another portion of the restaurant.
11. This Order is entered pursuant to an agreement of the parties at a custody conciliation
conference. The parties may modify the provisions of this Order by mutual consent. In the absence of
mutual consent, the terms of this Order shall control.
cc: Jane Adams, Esquire - Counsel for Father
Lauren M. Oeser - Mother
r-uwara L. Uuido J.
]Hi -110
AV
KEVIN M. OESER
Plaintiff
vs.
LAUREN M. OESER
Defendant
Prior Judge: Edward E. Guido
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
08-4437 CIVIL ACTION LAW
IN CUSTODY
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 Child who is the subject of this litigation is as
follows:
NAME DATE OF BIRTH CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF
Harlee J. Oeser July 16, 2006
Mother/Father
2. A custody conciliation conference was held on October 21, 2008, with the following
individuals in attendance: the Father, Kevin M. Oeser, with his counsel, Jane Adams, Esquire, and the
Mother, Lauren M. Oeser, who is not represented by counsel in this matter.
3. The parties agreed to entry of an Order in the form as attached.
Date Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire
Custody Conciliator
-A OM &
&U ULAKIS
Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire
Attorney I.D. #: 86914
36 South Hanover Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 249-0900
KEVIN M. OESER,
Respondent/Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
V.
LAUREN M. OESER,
Petitioner/Defendant
NO. 08-4437 CIVIL ACTION - LAW
. IN CUSTODY
TO THE HONORABLE EDWARD E. GUIDO, JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
AND NOW, comes the Petitioner, Lauren M. Oeser, by and through her attorney, Kara W.
Haggerty, Esquire, of ABOM & KUTULAKIs, L.L.P., and respectfully petitions for transfer of venue,
and in support thereof avers the following:
1. Petitioner is Lauren M. Oeser, who currently resides at 100 Water Street, Apartment 8,
Everett, Bedford County, Pennsylvania.
2. Respondent is Kevin M. Oeser, who currently resides at 305 Ross Avenue, Apartment C,
New Cumberland York County, Pennsylvania.
3. The subject minor child is Harlee J. Oeser, born July 16, 2006.
4. The parties have a Custody Order out of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania at docket
number 2008-4437. This Order arose from a filing of a Complaint in Custody filed on
July 24, 2008 in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County.
5. Cumberland County did not have jurisdiction of the custody action as Father has resided
in York County since April 2007.
6. In approximately April 2008 the parties had separated and Mother moved to Bedford
County, Pennsylvania.
7. The parties are exercising a shared physical custody arrangement with the child with the
exchanges occurring Sundays at the Walmart in Bedford, Pennsylvania.
8. This custody arrangement was implemented following a Temporary Custody Order
entered pursuant to a Protection from Abuse Action filed in Bedford County wherein
Father consented to a Temporary PFA being entered for a period of approximately six
weeks until the final Custody Order could be entered.
9. At all appearances in Cumberland County Mother was not represented by Counsel.
10. Mother is not seeking to change the physical custody schedule but is seeking to transfer
the Order to a Court that has an interest in the case.
11. Mother believes that Bedford County is the County that would have jurisdiction over this
custody action.
12. Mother believes that Bedford County, not Cumberland County, is the proper venue for
this custody action pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement
Act, 23 Pa.C.S.A. Section 5401 et. seq., and that the Custody action filed in Cumberland
County should be transferred to Bedford County.
13. The provisions of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act
allocating jurisdiction and functions between and among courts of different states shall
also allocate jurisdiction and functions between and among courts of common pleas of
this Commonwealth. 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 5471.
14. The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County does not have jurisdiction to make
an initial child custody determination, as neither parent resides in Cumberland County and
Bedford County is a home county of the child. 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 5421.
15. The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County does not have exclusive, continuing
jurisdiction over this custody matter because neither the child not the parties have a
significant connection with Cumberland County, and substantial evidence is no longer
available in Cumberland County concerning the children's care, protection, training and
personal relationships. 23 Pa.C.S.A. §5422.
16. Petitioner has contacted Attorney for Father, Jane Adams, Esquire, who is opposed to the
filing of this Motion.
WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests This Honorable Court to transfer jurisdiction
over the above-docketed custody action to Bedford County, Pennsylvania.
Respectfully submitted,
DATE , 2Z
ABOM&KUTULAKi,, L.L.P.
Kara W. Haggerty
Supreme Court ID 84Z3
36 South Hanover Street
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
(717) 249-0900
Attorney for Petitioner
VERIFICATION
I, LAUREN OESER, verify that the statements made in the attached
document are true and correct. 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
LAUREN OESER
L
AND NOW, this day of QT1,1?1 ?i 200A I, Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire, of
Abom & Kutulakis, L.L.P, hereby certify that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing
Petition for Transfer of Venue, upon the Respondent by depositing, or causing to be deposited,
same in the United States Mail, First-class mail, postage prepaid addressed to the following:
Jane Adams, Esquire
17 West South Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
Date: 2b 1
Respectfully submitted,
Abom & Kutulakis, L.L.P.
Kara W. Haggerty, Es
Attorney ID No. 8691
36 South Hanover Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 249-0900
Attorney for the Petitioner
:A
wr a
.
R?
JAN ? 3 2009
KEVIN M. OESER,
Respondent/Plaintiff
V.
LAUREN M. OESER,
Petitioner/Defendant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA
NO. 08-4437 CIVIL ACTION - LAW
IN CUSTODY
RULE TO SHOW CAUSE
AND NOW, this kb_ day of January, 2009, upon Petition of Kara W. Haggerty,
Esquire, a Rule is hereby issued upon the Respondent to show cause why the Petitioner should not
be permitted to Transfer jurisdiction of the within custody matter to Bedford County.
Rule returnable ? days after the date of service of this Order. Service to be by
first-class mail upon Jane Adams, Esquire, counsel for Respondent, Kevin M. Oeser.
EDWARD E. GUIDO, judge
tdj:,-
5,,,?t r ?1tt!
L u .9 1"11L Z Vr 60OZ
i
KEVIN M. OESER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs.
No. 08 - 4437 Civil Term
LAUREN M. OESER, : IN CUSTODY
Defendant
PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S
PETITION TO TRANSFER VENUE
AND NOW COMES, Petitioner, Kevin M. Oeser, by and through his attorney,
Jane Adams, Esquire, and responds to Defendant's Petition to Transfer Venue, and in
support thereof, avers the following:
1. Admitted.
2. Admitted, Father's address is 305 Ross Avenue, Apartment C., New
Cumberland, Pennsylvania, 17070, which is in York County. The Cumberland County
line is approximately 1000 feet from Father's residence.
3. Admitted.
4. Admitted. In addition, the Order arose from the parties' agreement, which
was reached at two conciliations.
5. Denied. Both parties were both present at the conciliation, and the Order
arose from an agreement of the parties.
6. Admitted.
7. Admitted.
8. Admitted in part, denied in part. The parties had been observing a week on
week off arrangement before entry of the Temporary Protection from Abuse Order.
This arrangement was confirmed by the parties' agreement, later reached at conciliation
and by the subsequent Order.
9. Admitted. However, Mother appeared two times before the conciliator, and
was given adequate notice of both hearings, and adequate opportunity to obtain
counsel.
10. Admitted.
11. It is admitted that Mother believes that Bedford County is the County that
would have jurisdiction over this custody action.
12. Father does not agree that jurisdiction should be transferred to Bedford
County, Pennsylvania.
13. Admitted.
14. Denied, the Order was entered pursuant to the parties' agreement.
15. Denied.
16. Admitted. Father is opposed to the transfer of Venue.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests the court to set a hearing date regarding this
matter.
Respectfully submitted,
Date: o? ?D v 9
J Adams, Esquire
No. 79465
W. . South St.
Pa. 17013
(717) 245-8508
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
r
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, this February 10, 2009, I, Jane Adams, Attorney for Father, Kevin M.
Oeser, hereby certify that a copy of Father's RESPONSE has been duly served upon
the Mother's Counsel by placing such in the custody of the United States Postal
Service, via certified mail, postage pre-paid addressed to:
Kara Haggerty, Esquire
36 South Hanover St.
Carlisle, Pa. 17013
ATTORNEY FOR FATHER
J e Adams, Esquire
I. No. 79465
1 . South St.
Carlisle, Pa. 17013
(717) 245-8508
ATTORNEY FOR
FATHER
w
4s
y .?
l/1
• ? °
''?
h
6 ?
a.)
b Y
o/ 46
FA
KEVIN M. OESER,
Plaintiff
vs.
LAUREN M. OESER,
Defendant
FEB ' Z 2009 G, 1
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
No. 08 - 4437 Civil Term
IN CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT
r
AND NOW, this day of r ?,?
2009,
a hearing regarding Defendant's Petition to Transfer Venue is scheduled for the
a? day of 2009, at 3:0 V *bl./P.M in
Courtroom No. -3 of the Cumberland County Courthouse in Carlisle, Pennsylvania.
cc: Kara Haggerty, Esquire
Jane Adams, Esquire
4?
ZO :;7 Wd C i 833 6001
alt 1C?Ia E .i? J 3i L 3a
30 -40-C 31 IJ
KEVIN M. OESER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V. : NO. 08-4437
LAUREN M. OESER, CIVIL ACTION -LAW
Defendant IN CUSTODY
PRAECIPE TO ENTER APPEARANCE
TO THE PROTHONOTARY:
Please enter my appearance to represent Plaintiff, Kevin M. Oeser, in the above
captioned action.
DATE: ? ^ (?2 ,-J?%j
Respectfully submitted,
JOANNE HARRISON
Joanne Harrison Clod
Attorney ID No.: 364
3 820 Market Street
Camp Hill, PA 17011
(717) 737-5890
PC
,?
?-, ?+ 'n
?,-, ? ? ?
? i?
ti ?
j.
.??, ? J t,
? ? -3,7
"?.
KEVIN M. OESER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
VS NO. 08-4437 CIVIL TERM
LAUREN M. OESER, IN CUSTODY
Defendant
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW,this 12th day of March, 2009, based upon the
agreement of the parties, this court shall retain jurisdiction and
Defendant/Petitioner's request for-change of venue is withdrawn.
By :hie
u
Edward/E. -Guido, J.
/oanne Clough, Esquire
For the Plaintiff
,,' ara Haggerty, Esquire
For the Defendant
:mlc
311 e/D9
`IW,;\` AC,Nf 3d
ono
80 : I Nd 9 I SO 6002
A8VIONOk liOdd 3Hi JO
33L4(7--G3113
_AOM &
Ku ULAKIS
Kara W. Haggerty, Expire
Attorney ZD. No.: 86914
2 Wrest High Street
Carksle, Pennylvania 17013
(717) 249-0900
KEVIN M. OESER,
Plaintiff/Respondent
V.
LAUREN M. OESER,
Defendant/Petitioner
RED- F '
OF THE PRT%H WTARY
1818 APR {6 PM 2c 52
CUMBE PL-%; Z OWNN
PEN'YWMlA
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 08-4437 CIVIL TERM
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
IN CUSTODY
AND NOW, comes the Petitioner, LARUEN M. OESER, by and through her
attorney, Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire, of ABOM & KUTULAKIS, L.L.P., and respectfully
petitions for modification of custody, and in support thereof avers the following:
1. Petitioner is Lauren M. Oeser, Defendant/Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as
"Mother', who currently resides at 166 South Main Street, Breezewood, Bedford
County, Pennsylvania and is represented by Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire, of Abom
& Kutulakis, L.L.P.
2. Respondent is Kevin M. Oeser, Plaintiff/Respondent (hereinafter referred to as
"Father"), who currently resides at 302 Ross Avenue, New Cumberland, York
County, Pennsylvania and is represented by Joanne Harrison Clough, Esquire, of
Joanne Harrison Clough, PC.
c * 1.?-3 3
I On October 29, 2008, the Honorable Edward E. Guido entered an Order that
details the custody Harlee J. Oeser (hereinafter referred to as the "Child"). Mother
and Father have shared legal and physical custody of the child, as set forth in the
Order attached hereto and made a part hereof marked "Exhibit A".
4. Paragraphs one (1) through three (3) of this Complaint are incorporated herein by
reference as though set forth in full.
5. The child was born on July 16, 2006, which means that she turned three (3) years
old this past July.
6. As a result of the child's age, it is appropriate that the child begin to attend
preschool in order to properly prepare her for her transition of going to school in a
couple of short years, and allow her to interact with other children and develop a
circle of friends.
7. Considering the fact the week on/week off situation cannot clearly continue once
the child begins to attend school due to the ninety (90) mile, two (2) hour trip that
separates the parents, Mother is petitioning this court to modify the custody
arrangement to give her primary physical custody of the child for the following
reasons:
a. The child is currently enrolled in preschool three days a week (on weeks
with Mother) near Mother's home in an effort to familiarize her to being
in a structured environment.
b. Mother plans to have the child attend school in her school district,
Everett Area, upon the child attaining school-age.
c. All of the child's healthcare needs are fulfilled at providers located near
Mother, and Mother has been the one to ensure all of the child's
healthcare needs are met.
d. Mother's extended family and most of Father's extended family, including
his father, aunt and brother, live in Bedford near Mother, which would
allow the child to visit with them more frequently if Mother had primary
physical custody.
e. Mother has been able to establish a stable environment for the child to
live in, to include the addition of a sibling in March 20101
f. It is unclear whether Father is able to provide similar stability due to being
laid off from his job. Furthermore, Mother has never been provided with
a contact telephone number to contact the child when she is in the
custody of Father.
g. Father has not played a role in ensuring that the child receives adequate
healthcare like Mother.
h. To the contrary, Father takes the child to the emergency room and fails to
disclose these visits, or their outcome, to mother.
i. Contrary to the best interests of the child, Father has made numerous
unfounded reports to Bedford County Children and Youth in an effort to
hinder Mother's relationship with the child.
j. Father makes disparaging remarks about Mother of the child to include
stating that Mother does not love the child now that she has a new baby.
k. It is believed and therefore averred that Father refuses to aid in
developmental milestones for the child to include dressing herself,
brushing her teeth, washing her hands and feeding herself.
1. It is believed and therefore averred that the best interest of the child will
be served by providing Mother primary physical custody and Father
partial physical custody on alternating weekends.
WHEREFORE, the Petitioner requests that this Court modify the existing Custody
Order to accommodate Mother's request to have primary physical custody of the child.
Respectfully submitted,
ABOM & KUTULM US, L.L.P.
DATE
Kara W. Haggerty, E
Supreme Court ID 8
2 West High Street
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
(717) 249-0900
Attorney for Petitioner/Defendant
VERIFICATION
I, LAUREN OESER, verify that the statements made in the attached
document are true and correct. 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 /b
LAUREN OESER
,?f CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
AND NOW, this ILP' day of April 2010, I, Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire, of Abom &
Kutulakis, L.L.P., hereby certify that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing
Petition for Modification of Custody, upon the Plaintiff by depositing, or causing to be
deposited, same in the United States Mail,, postage prepaid addressed to the following:
Joanne Harrison Clough, Esquire
Joanne Harrison Clough, PC
3820 Market Street
Camp Hill, PA 17011
Attorney for the Res
ondent/Plaintiff
Respectfully submitted,
Abom & Kutulakis, L.L.P.
Kara W. Haggerty,?Es e
Attorney ID No.
2 West High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 249-0900
Attorney for the Petitioner/Defendant
KEVIN M. OESER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
2008-4437 CIVIL ACTION LAW
LAUREN M. OESER
DEFENDANT
IN CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, Tuesday, April 20, 2010 , upon consideration of the attached Complaint,
it is hereby directed that parties and their respective counsel appear before Dawn S. Sunday, Esq. , the conciliator,
at 39 West Main Street, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 on Monday, May 24, 2010 at 9:00 AM
for a Pre-Hearing Custody Conference. At such conference, an effort will be made to resolve the issues in dispute; or
if this cannot be accomplished, to define and narrow the issues to be heard by the court, and to enter into a temporary
order. 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/ Dawn S. Sunday,Esq.
Custody Conciliator
The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County is required by law to comply with the Americans
with Disabilites Act of 1990. For information about accessible facilities and reasonable accommodations
available to disabled individuals having business before the court, please contact our office. All arrangements
must be made at least 72 hours prior to any hearing or business before the court. You must attend the scheduled
conference or hearing.
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR ATTORNEY AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT
HAVE AN ATTORNEY OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET
FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHF,RF YOI 1 CAN GFT I FCYAT 14FI P
umberland County Bar Association
'0.1 0? ??, 32 South Bedford Street
iA( coigyx - Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
Q Q ( Telephone (717) 249-3166
•a C) _ 1 0 /V 0iiU_ m.aA ?cA -fib
ti -AC) - 10
14 oxc\son
v cLxL
R,r7
,,11
C!
N
0
0
s.•
N
O
N
q
M
KEVIN M. OESER,
Plaintiff
V.
LAUREN M. OESER,
Defendant
rT'r
IN THE COURT OF COMMON P
^' "'7 PI
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENlYLVA-MIA
NO. 08-4437"? CIVIL ACTION - LAW= _-'
IN CUSTODY
RESPONDENT'S ANSWER TO PETITION FOR MODIFICATION OF CUSTODY
AND NOW, this J??day of May, 2010, comes Respondent/Plaintiff, Kevin M. Oeser, by
and through his attorney, Joanne Harrison Clough, Esquire, and respectfully files this Answer and
Counterclaim to Defendant Mother's Petition for Modification of Custody, and avers as follows:
1. Admitted in part. It is admitted that the Petitioner is Lauren M. Oeser and that she is
represented by Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire. Respondent Father had no knowledge that Defendant
Mother had relocated again to the alleged new address of 166 South Main Street, Breezewood, PA
until he received a copy of the Petition for Modification of Custody. Defendant Mother has moved at
least four times since the parties separated and has repeatedly failed to provide Father proper notice of
the address where she has been residing with the minor child during her periods of alternating weekly
custody.
2. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is admitted that the Respondent/Plaintiff is Kevin
M. Oeser and that he is represented by Joanne Harrison Clough, Esquire. It is specifically denied that
he lives at 302 Ross Avenue, New Cumberland, PA. To the contrary, he resides in the same
apartment where Defendant Mother resided prior to vacating the marital residence at 305 C. Ross
Avenue, New Cumberland, York County, PA.
3. Admitted. By way of further explanation, Defendant Mother had filed a Petition
attempting to transfer the custody action from Cumberland County to Bedford County in early 2009 in
a failed attempt to gain jurisdictional advantage by trying to move the custody action away from the
home jurisdiction of the minor child to the new county where Mother moved after separation. The
Court denied Mother's request to transfer jurisdiction.
COUNT I - MODIFICATION FOR CUSTODY
4. No responsive pleading is required to this averment.
5. Admitted. The child will be four years old on July 16, 2010.
6. Admitted in part. It is admitted that the child is now at the age where she would be
eligible to be enrolled in pre-school. It is specifically denied that pre-school is necessary to prepare
her for transition to start in elementary school when she is old enough; however, Respondent/Plaintiff
Father is able to enroll the child in pre-school where he resides. By way of further information,
Petitioner Mother and Respondent Father have shared legal custody of the minor child and the child
should not have been enrolled in any school or other program without Father's participation in the
decision and agreement since both parties share legal custody of the child. Respondent Father did not
know the child had been formally enrolled in pre-school until he received the Petition for
Modification of Custody.
7. It is admitted that a week on/week off custody situation can not continue once the child
commences attending public school in the fall of 2011 as a direct result of Mother's decision to
unilaterally move more than two hours from the child's home jurisdiction. It is specifically denied
2
that it is in the child's best interest to change her primary custody to Mother at any time:
a. Respondent Father has no information regarding Mother's unilateral and illegal
enrollment of the child in the pre-school program since Petitioner Mother has failed
to ever honor Father's shared legal custody status and routinely makes legal
decisions without Father's input in direct violation of the current Custody Order. By
way of further explanation, Father is able to enroll the child in a pre-school program
in her home jurisdiction;
b. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is admitted that Mother may "plan to have the
child attend school in her school district, Everett Area" upon the child attaining
school age status; however, Father will not agree to the child residing in Mother's
primary custody. Since Mother has moved at least four times since April of 2008, it
is unknown what school district Mother will be residing in when the child attains
school age;
C. Denied. It is specifically denied all of child's healthcare needs are fulfilled at
providers located near Mother, or that Mother has been the one to ensure that all
healthcare needs are met. To the contrary, the child's primary physician since
shortly after birth is Dr. Sandra Costa, of Heritage Family Medicine, where the
parties have taken the child since she was an infant. Father has routinely attended
to the child's medical needs during his periods of physical custody. By way of
further explanation, Mother has failed to apprise Father of any medical treatments
or other care she has provided for the child during her periods of alternating weekly
custody. Due to Mother's repeated attempts to file false Protection from Abuse
3
Orders against Father, direct contact between Father and Mother is not possible
since Father's only method of assuring Mother can not file yet another false
claim against him is for Father to have no direct contact with her.
d. It is admitted that Mother has a number of relatives that reside in Bedford County.
Likewise, Respondent Father has numerous relatives that reside near his residence.
Father's mother resides with him and the minor child. His uncle, cousins, and other
numerous relatives live in the child's home jurisdiction.
e. Denied. It is specifically denied that Mother has been able to establish a stable
environment for the child to live in. To the contrary, Mother has moved at least
four times of which Respondent is aware of since she vacated the marital residence
in April of 2008. Father has no knowledge of what type of living environment
Mother is currently residing or how stable that environment is and strict proof
thereof is demanded at time of trial.
f. Denied. It is specifically denied that Mother has never been provided with a contact
telephone number to contact the child when she is in the custody of Father. To the
contrary, Father and his relatives have previously provided Mother with his cell
phone number and Mother has telephone numbers for Respondent's father and
other relatives which have been made available to her for her to have contact
with Father. It is further denied that Father is unable to provide for the child or
that he is "laid off from his job". Father is currently employed. Father has been laid
off from work in the past two years on several occasions due to the current economic
situation but he has always diligently looked for and fortunately been able to secure
4
new employment. Father is stable and able to continue to provide a safe stable
home environment for the minor child.
g. Denied. It is specifically denied that Father has not played a role in assuring the
child receives adequate healthcare. To the contrary, Father has attended to all the
child's healthcare needs during his periods of physical custody and has had to seek
treatment for the child on more than one occasion as a result of Mother returning
child with a health need that had been unattended.
h. Admitted in part. Denied in part. It is admitted that Father has had to take the child
to the emergency room before. Respondent Father does indirectly communicate
this information to Mother by notifying his father who then provides information as
needed to which ever individual Mother has at the physical custody exchange point.
As a direct result of Mother's repeated attempts to file false Protection from Abuse
charges against Father and on the advice of counsel, Father has absolutely no direct
contact with Mother.
i. Denied. It is specifically denied that Father has made numerous unfounded reports
to Bedford County Children and Youth or acted in any manner to hinder Mother's
relationship with the child. To the contrary, there have been occasions when the
child has been returned to Father with bruising and other injuries without any
explanation and on advice of medical care providers, Respondent Father's relatives
on at least one occasion made reports that they had a fear for the best interest and
welfare of the child when in Mother's custody as a result of injuries the child
presented with after an alternating week visit with Mother and it is believed and
5
averred that medical providers where the child was treated while in Father's care
had also made inquiries and/or reports. Any and all reports made by Father's
relatives or medical providers were all specifically made out of genuine concern for
the best interest and permanent welfare of the minor child.
j. Denied. It is specifically denied that Father makes disparaging remarks about
Mother. It is adamantly denied that Father ever told his daughter that her Mother
does not love her anymore now that she has a new baby. Respondent Father has
observed the child expressing normal adjustment issues of dealing with the fact that
she now has a sibling at her Mother's home and is no longer the center of attention.
Father has assisted the child as appropriate with that transition and at no time has
ever suggested to the child that her Mother does not love her or that she is not
important to her Mother. Father has concerns regarding Mother and Mother's
paramour's physical discipline of the minor child and believes she may be
inappropriately physically disciplined during times she may be acting out while at
her Mother's home.
k. Denied. It is specifically denied that Father refuses to aid in the developmental
milestones for the child. Father supervises and monitors all the developmental
milestones that Harley is continually achieving.
1. Denied. It is specifically denied that the best interest and permanent welfare of the
minor child would be served by granting Mother primary physical custody of the
minor child and reverting Father to an alternating weekend Father status. To the
contrary, this minor child has resided with her father since birth and has resided with
6
Father on an alternating weekly basis since Mother unilaterally decided to move
more than two hours away from the child's home when she made the decision to
separate from Respondent Husband. It is Respondent Father who has continued to
maintain a stable home environment which was the marital residence prior to
Petitioner Mother moving to Bedford County, PA.
COUNTERCLAIM
9. Paragraphs 1 through 8 here above are incorporated by reference as if set forth in full
here below.
10. Defendant Mother unilaterally decided to vacate the marital residence and relocate to
Bedford County, PA. in April of 2008.
11. Respondent Father has maintained the child's relationship with her primary care
physician that she had since birth and has also attended to all of the child's developmental needs and
milestones during his periods of alternating weekly custody.
12. Since the parties' separation, Defendant Mother has engaged in course of conduct to
repeatedly attempt to alienate the affections of the minor child from her Father including but not
limited to the following.
a. Filing a request to transfer the custody action from the home jurisdiction to Bedford
County in an attempt to obtaining more favorable forum to pursue a primary custody
case against Plaintiff/Respondent Father, which attempt failed; and On March 12,
2009, Cumberland County Court entered an Order retaining jurisdiction of the
custody action.
7
b. Within approximately two months of losing the request to transfer jurisdiction from
Cumberland County to Bedford County, Mother filed a Protection from Abuse
action against Father on behalf of herself and the minor child seeking a Protection
Order granting her physical custody of the child. Mother received a temporary
exparte Order granting her custody. Respondent Father at great legal expense, had
an evidentiary hearing on the Petition for Protection from Abuse and the Court
found in favor of Father, and did not believe the factual allegations of Mother and
dismissed the Protection from Abuse action and directed the child be immediately
returned to Father for his periods of alternating weekly physical custody.
d. On one prior occasion, Defendant Mother filed a previous Protection from Abuse
action against Respondent Father which was also dismissed.
e. As a direct result of Mother's repeated fabrication of false claims against Father,
Father is no longer able to have any direct contact with Mother in order to prevent
her from manufacturing additional false complaints against him.
f. Despite the relationship between the parties, at no time has Respondent Father ever
engaged in a course of conduct in an attempt to alienate this child against her
Mother and has always worked diligently and in fact has provided all transportation
for the periods of physical custody for Mother since her economic situation and
home life is so unstable she rarely has a vehicle to transport the child. It is solely
through the repeated continuous efforts of Respondent Father, at his expense, that
the minor child travels to and from Bedford County for her periods of alternating
weekly custody with her Mother.
8
g. Respondent Father believes it is in the best interest and permanent welfare of the
minor child that he be awarded primary physical custody of the minor child and that
she visit with her Mother on an alternating weekly basis and at such other times as
the parties may agree.
h. It is a direct result of Mother's contentious, combative and repeated behavior in
making false claims against Father that the parties can not engage in a meaningful
shared legal custody arrangement with the child and it is believed and averred that
Father should be the sole legal custodian of the child and be the parent legally
empowered to make all major parenting decisions regarding the health, safety,
education and welfare of the minor child.
i. Respondent Father is of the belief and therefore avers that Mother has filed reports
against him with Children and Youth because on at least one occasion Children and
Youth has come to Father's home to conduct an investigation which was unfounded.
WHEREFORE, Respondent Father respectfully requests that this Honorable Court deny
Mother's request that she be granted primary physical custody of the child and grant Father sole legal
and primary physical custody of the parties' minor child.
Respectfully Submitted,
JOANNE HARRISON
juAnrij?,-nAKK15ON CLOI?G ESQUIRE
Attorney I.D. No.: 66378
3820 Market Street
Camp Hill, PA 17011
(717) 737-5890
Attorney for Kevin M. Oeser
9
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Joanne Harrison Clough, Esquire, do hereby certify that on this date I served a copy of
the foregoing document by hand delivery to the following individual:
Hand Delivered to:
Kara Haggerty, Esquire
Attorney for Lauren M. Oeser
at the Custody Conciliation held at Dawn Sunday's office on May 26, 2010
39 West Main Street, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055.
Date: ? J,? , I (?
3820 Market Street
Camp Hill, PA 17011
(717) 737-5890
Attorney for Kevin Oeser
JUN 01 2010 /
t l C'7 •-?.l
KEVIN M. OESER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OFF.;
Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLV,, NIA`s"-
vs. 2008-4437 CIVIL ACTION LAW
LAUREN M. OESER y
Defendant IN CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this *7?4 day of , 2010, upon
consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation eport, it is ordered and directed as follows:
1. The parties shall submit themselves, their minor Child, and any other individuals deemed
necessary by the evaluator to a custody evaluation to be performed by a professional selected by
agreement between the parties. The purpose of the evaluation shall be to obtain independent
professional recommendations concerning custodial arrangements which will best meet the needs of
the Child when the Child begins preschool or kindergarten in light of the two hour difference between
the parties' areas of residence. The parties shall sign any authorizations deemed necessary by the
evaluator in order to obtain additional information pertaining to the parties or the Child. All costs of
the evaluation shall be shared equally between the parties.
2. After the parties have completed the evaluation and obtained the evaluator's
recommendations, the parties shall cooperate in making arrangements to participate in a course of co-
parenting counseling with a professional selected by agreement. The purpose of the co-parenting
counseling shall be to assist the parties in establishing sufficient communication and cooperation to
enable them to effectively co-parent the Child and to follow the custodial schedule in a manner which
will promote the Child's emotional well-being and development.
3. The parties shall share responsibility for providing transportation for the weekly exchanges
of custody. Unless otherwise agreed between the parties, the Mother shall transport the Child to the
Flying J Truck Stop in Carlisle when returning the Child to the Father's custody and the Father shall
transport the Child to the Gateway Travel Plaza in Breezewood when returning custody of the Child to
the Mother.
4. Within 60 days after receipt of the custody evaluator's recommendations, counsel for either
party may contact the conciliator, if necessary, to schedule an additional custody conciliation
conference.
BY T WR,
M. L. Ebert, Jr. J.
cc: ''Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire -Counsel for Mother
Joanne Harrison Clough, Esquire - Counsel for Father
-7 Ile)
AFL
KEVIN M. OESER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
VS.
LAUREN M. OESER
Defendant
2-4437 CIVIL ACTION LAW
008
: IN CUSTODY
Prior Judge: Edward E. Guido
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 Child who is the subject of this litigation is as
follows:
NAME DATE OF BIRTH CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF
Harlee J. Oeser July 16, 2006 Mother/Father
2. A custody conciliation conference was held on May 26, 2010, with the following individuals
in attendance: the Father, Kevin M. Oeser, with his counsel, Joanne Harrison Clough, Esquire, and the
Mother, Lauren M. Oeser, with her counsel, Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire.
3. The parties agreed to entry of an Order in the form as attached.
Date Dawn S. Sunday, Esquir
Custody Conciliator
OM &
LITUI AKIS
Para Ik". Haggett', E3quire
Attorney LD. No.: 56914
2 IF est High Street
Carlisle, Penn ylvania 17013
(717) 249-0900
KEVIN M. OESER,
Plaintiff/Respondent
V.
LAUREN M. OESER,
Defendant/Petitioner
11., E... 71 J (' •' 1-'r t
2011 AUG - I 1•' '3
CUMBERLAt
PENNSYL"11, "r
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 08-4437 CIVIL TERM
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
IN CUSTODY
PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF
AND NOW, this 1" day of August, 2011, comes the Petitioner, Lauren M. Oeser, by and
through her attorney, Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire, of ABOI1 & KUTULA S, L.L.P., and respectfully
petitions this Honorable Court to grant Petitioner special relief, and in support thereof avers the
following:
1. A Petition for Modification for Custody was filed on April 16, 2010 by Petitioner,
Lauren M. Oeser, (hereinafter referred to as "Mother") in which Petitioner requests
primary physical custody of the child, Harlee J. Oeser, born July 16, 2006.
2. Attorney for Respondent filed an Answer and Counterclaim on or about May 26,
2010.
3. The parties attended a conciliation conference on May 26, 2010, at which time the
parties were ordered to submit themselves to undergo a custody evaluation. The
Order of Court addressed that the custody evaluation was necessary to obtain
independent professional recommendations concerning custodial arrangements which
47t),00 Pa A-MY
ev 303`7
e*a6 a(,0aa
will best meet the needs of the Child when the Child begins kindergarten in light of
the two hour difference between the parties' areas of residence.
a. The parties agreed to continue to share joint legal and physical custody of the
Child pending the outcome of the custody evaluation.
4. It is acknowledged that both parties indicated a need for some time to come up with
the funding for the evaluation.
5. In March 2011, Petitioner contacted Anthea Stebbins at InterWorks, the evaluator
agreed upon by all parties, to schedule her appointments as the beginning of the
school year was drawing near.
6. On Monday, April 11, 2011, counsel for both parties received an email from Anthea
Stebbins indicating that the evaluation for the parties is currently on hold due to
Respondent's indication that he is unable to pay for his portion of the evaluation. (See
April 11, 2011 email from Anthea Stebbins, attached hereto as `Exhibit A').
7. Undersigned counsel contacted counsel for Respondent who confirmed that her client
indicated that he is unable to pay for the evaluation.
8. Respondent never advised Petitioner of his inability to pay for the evaluation in
sufficient time to make alternative arrangements for an evaluation.
9. The minor child is scheduled to begin school in August 2011.
10. It is believed and therefore averred that Mother has enrolled the child in school in the
Bedford area so as to be prepared for the beginning of the school year.
11. It is believed and therefore averred that it is in the minor child's best interest to be in
the primary custody of Mother and attend school in the Bedford area.
12. It is believed and therefore averred that Mother's efforts to complete the court-
ordered evaluation were thwarted by Father's failure to comply with the court order.
13. It is believed and therefore averred that Father has not offered any alternative
custodial arrangements to Mother in light of his inability to complete the court-
ordered custody evaluation.
14. It is believed and therefore averred that Father has ignored the fact that the minor
child must begin school in the 2011-2012 school year.
15. It is believed and therefore averred that Mother is the more responsible parent, in that
she had taken the necessary steps to complete the custody evaluation and has been
preparing for the minor child to begin school.
16. It is believed and therefore averred that it is in the minor child's best interest to be in
the primary custody of Mother beginning at least one week prior to the beginning of
the school year.
17. It is believed and therefore averred that it is in the best interest of the Minor Child to
exercise custody with her Father on alternating weekends during the school year.
18. It is believed and therefore averred that Father's actions have been malicious and
willful in nature and have not been in the Minor Child's best interests.
19. It is Father's failure to act in the minor child's best interests that caused Mother to
have to file the within Petition for Special Relief.
20. It is believed and therefore averred that Father should be responsible for Mother's
attorney's fees and costs associated with the filing of this Petition.
WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Lauren Oeser, respectfully requests that this Honorable Court
to grant the Special Relief and modify the existing Court Order granting Mother Primary Physical
Custody. It is further requested that Father's periods of custody be limited to alternating weekends
until a Hearing may be held on this Petition.
DATE
Respectfully submitted,
ABom & KUTULA"s, L.L.P.
Kara W. Haggerty, s 'r
Attorney ID No. 8691
2 West High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 249-0900
Attorney for Petitioner/Defendant
Oeser v. Oeser - CustoCy valuation 1.:pC'a`e
K haggerty
From: Anthea S.ebbins [astebbins@interNorksonline.com]
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 3:2:2 PM
To: 'joanne Clough'; K haggerty
Cc: 'Interwork.s - Case Management'; 'front desk'
Subject: Oeser v. Oeser - Custody E=valuation Update
Dear Attorneys Clough and Haggerty,
p <T? 1 of t
I am writing to advise you that the evaluation for Lauren and Kevin Oeser is currently on hold. We are
unable to proceed at this point as Mr. Oeser has indicated his inability to pay his portion of the
evaluation at this time. The total cost of the evaluation is $5,900 which includes four adults and one
child. Ms. Oeser is currently scheduled for her intake session next week. I will be contacting her shortly
to cancel the appointment. We will keep the original documents on file and be available to proceed
with the evaluation when Mr. Oeser is ready.
Thank you for the referral. We look forward to being able to proceed for your clients in the near future.
Anthea Stebbins, MSW
INTERWORKS
2201 North Second St., 2nd Floor
Harrisburg, PA 17110
Ofc: 717-236-6630
Fax: 717-236-6677
frontdesk@interworksonline.com
This email contains PRIVLEDGED and CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended only for the use of the
recipients named above. The information may be protected by state and federal laws, including,
without limitation, the provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996
(HIPAA), which prohibits unauthorized disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any use or dissemination of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
email in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply email at the address provided above and
delete this message. Thank you.
EXHIBIT
11
4/11/2011
VERIFICATION
I, LAUREN OESER, verify that the statements made in the attached
document are true and correct. 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
LAUREN OESER
AND NOW, this 1" day of August, 2011, I, Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire, of Abom &
Kutulakis, L.L.P, hereby certify that I did serve a true and correct copy of the foregoing Petition for
Special Relief, upon the Plaintiff by depositing, or causing to be deposited, same in the United States
Mail, Certified Mail, postage prepaid addressed to the following:
Joanne Harrison Clough, Esquire
3820 Market Street
.Camp Hill, PA 17011
pondentl Plaintiff
Attorney for Res
Respectfully submitted,
Abom c& Kutulaks, L.L.P.
Kara W. Haggerty, Epq
Attorney ID No. 869
2 West High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 249-0900
KEVIN M. OESER,
Plaintiff/Respondent
V.
LAUREN M. OESER,
Defendant/Petitioner
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 08-4437 CIVIL TERM
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
IN CUSTODY
AND NOW, this -1 day of kw-y? , 2011, upon
consideration of the attached Petition for Special Relief, it is ORDERED and DECREED
Petitioner is granted Primary Physical Custody and Respondent's periods of custody are modified to
alternating weekends until a Hearing is held on said Petition.
FURTHERMORE, it is ORDERED and DECREED that the parties and their respective
counsel appear before this Honorable Court, on the C & day of A!?_, 2011, at
-m., in Courtroom No. 3 of the Cumberland County Courthouse for a Hearing on
%.3d X w17.
said Petition.
THE
J-
Distribution:
Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire, Attorney for the Petitioner/ Defendant
/ Joanne Harrison Clough, Attorney for Respondent/Plaintf { o
r? ? ?
KEVIN M. OESER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V. 2008-4437 CIVIL ACTION LAW: --t
~T C77 ? f?l --
LAUREN M. OESER
IN CUSTODY t "
DEFENDANT
-n
ORDER OF COURT'
AND NOW, Thursday, August 11, 2011 upon consideration of the attached Complaint,
it is hereby directed that parties and their respective counsel appear before John J. Mangan, Jr., Esq. , the conciliator,
at 4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle on Tuesday, August 16, 2011 __ 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. 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/ ohn . Man an r. Es . j PA
Custody Conciliator
The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County is required by law to comply with the Americans
with Disabilites Act of 1990. For information about accessible facilities and reasonable accommodations
available to disabled individuals having business before the court, please contact our office. All arrangements
must be made at least 72 hours prior to any hearing or business before the court. You must attend the scheduled
conference or hearing.
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR ATTORNEY AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT
HAVE AN ATTORNEY OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET
FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP.
Cumberland County Bar Association
32 South Bedford Street
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
Telephone (717) 249-3166
? eta. eon ma???d ?a?5ei
y edlec? h? CYOL? 4 l? R? ' ?Ayass a;? ? A or
e? ?,
KEVIN M. OESER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
Plaintiff/Respondent CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSY=?,VANIA
V. NO. 08-4437 CIVIL TERM
LAUREN M. OESER, CIVIL ACTION - LAW
?t ? xa• ? -t-p
Defendant/Petitioner IN CUSTODY=
?Y3
d. CJ
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 5th day of August, 2011, -:1-t N)
appearing to the Court that the issue cannot be resolved prior
to the commencement of school, our prior order of Court dated
September 10, 2008, shall remain in full force and effect,
subject to the modifications contained in Paragraph 3 of the
June 7, 2010, Order, unless modified by agreement of the
parties.
The Court Administrator is directed to schedule
this for a conciliation to be held on or before August 22, 2011,
to give the parties the opportunity to work this out. If an
agreement cannot be reached at the conciliation conference, we
will hold a hearing on the merits on September 30, 2011,
commencing at 9:30 a.m. If an agreement is reached at the
conciliation conference, counsel are directed to notify our
chambers so that we may cancel the hearing.
By the Court,
00
Edward E. Guido, J.
Kara W. Haggerty, Esquire
Attorney for Petitioner/Defendant OOP PS
Joanne Harrison Clough, Esquire d((?j
Attorney for Respondent/Plaintiff
Court Administrator l?Ccy" cF l
srs