Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-5973Harry M. Baturin, Esquire BATURIN & BATURIN 2504 North Second Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17110 (717) 234-2427 CRAIG E. STARNER ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. VS. CASE NO.: 0e - S'9Z? e t u? L l LORETTA M. MOORE, Defendant ) CIVIL LAW - CUSTODY COMPLAINT FOR CUSTODY AND NOW, this day of , 2008, comes the Plaintiff, CRAIG F. STARNER, by and through his Attorneys, the Law Offices of BA TURIN & BA TURIN, and files this Complaint for Custody and respectfully represents as follows: 1. The Plaintiff is, CRAIG E. STARNER, an adult individual, sui juris, who currently resides at 921 Gettysburg Pike, Apt. E, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055. 2. The Defendant is LORETTA M. MOORE, an adult individual, sui juris, who currently resides at 1550 Williams Grove Road, #144, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17055. 3. The Plaintiff and Defendant are the natural parents of two children: CYLE STARNER-MOORE, fourteen (14) years old, born November 3, 1994, and COLE STARNER MOORE, five (5) years old, born February 4, 2003. Said minor children are the subject of this Custody Complaint. 4. Plaintiff seeks shared legal and shared physical custody of the parties' minor children, CYLE STARKER-MOORE and COLE STARNER-MOORE. 5. The aforementioned minor children are presently in the custody of their Natural Nother in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.. 6. Since birth, the said minor children have lived at the following address with the following persons: DATE ADDRESS CUSTODY Present 1550 Williams Grove Road, #144 Natural Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Mother 7. The relationship of the Plaintiff in the Custody action to subject minor children is that of Natural Father. 8. The relationship of the Defendant in the Custody action to subject minor children is that of Natural Mother. 9. The Plaintiff has not participated as a party or witness, or in any other capacity, in other litigation concerning the custody of the aforementioned minor children. 10. The Plaintiff has no information of a custody proceeding concerning the children pending in a Court of this Commonwealth. Plaintiff does not know of a person not a party to the proceedings who has physical custody of the children or claims to have custody or visitation rights with respect to the children. 11. The best interest and permanent welfare of said minor children will be served by granting the relief requested because: a. Plaintiff/Natural Father is well able to adequately provide for the continuing health, educational needs and general welfare of said minor children; b. Plaintiff/Natural Father is well able to adequately provide for said children with a proper and wholesome environment, physically, emotionally, psychologically and socially, within which to live; It is in the best interest of the minor children generally that shared legal and physical custody be granted to the children's Natural Father, CRAIG E. STARNER, Plaintiff herein. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, CRAIG E. STARNER, requests this Honorable Court to grant the relief requested, and any other relief deemed appropriate, and enter a Final Order granting shared legal and physical custody of said minor children, CYLE STARNER MOORE and COLE STARNER-MOORE, to the Plaintiff herein, CRAIG E. STARNER. Respectfully submitted, BATURIN &BATURRIN ?L. By: 16?(11, Ha rry M. Baturin Attorney ID #83006 2604 North Second Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 234-2427 Attorney for Plaintiff Dated: VERIFICATION I VERIFY THAT THE STATEMENTS MADE IN THIS PETITION ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, BELIEF, AND INFORMATION. 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• G E. STARNER VERIFICATION I VERIFY THAT THE STATEMENTS MADE IN THIS PETITION ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, BELIEF, AND INFORMATION. I UNDERSTAND THAT FALSE STATEMENTS HEREIN ARE MADE SUBJECT TO THE PENALTIES OF 18 Pa.C.S. §4904 RELATING TO UNSWORN FALSIFICATION TO AUTHORITIES. ! ?Q DATE: `• ? V .. y -?, ?s?^? f? ? r ? ? ? -" ? -r? "' t ? ? ? ? `,. :!? ? ? s -- y.. i'w? ?. t?- CRAIG E. STARNER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. 2008-5973 CIVIL ACTION LAW LORETTA M. MOORE IN CUSTODY DEFENDANT ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, Monday, October 13, 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, November 11, 2008 at 1:00 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/ 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 WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Telephone (717) 249-3166 `6V VN VAIASWO AlNfY';,l 7' 1*40*6AW ?o NOV 17 20086 CRAIG E. STARNER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. 2008-5973 CIVIL ACTION LAW LORETTA M. MOORE Defendant IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this b day of ti oewd? 2008, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows: 1. The parties shall make arrangements for their son, Cyle, to participate in counseling at Guidance Associates or other professional selected by agreement between the parties. Within one (1) day of the date of the conciliation conference, the parties shall contact Guidance Associates to obtain the earliest available appointment. The parties shall participate in the counseling process as recommended by the counselor. 2. Pending the conciliation conference scheduled in this Order and further Order of Court or agreement of the parties, the Mother shall have primary physical custody of the Children and the Father shall have partial physical custody as follows: A. During every week, the Father shall have custody of the Children from Wednesday after work until 9:00 p.m. In the event Cyle joins the church youth group on Wednesday evenings, the Father's mid-week period of custody shall automatically be changed to Tuesdays evenings. The Mother shall provide the Father with at least one (1) week advance notice of any such change. B. The Father shall also have custody of the Children on alternating weekends, beginning on Saturday, November 22, 2008, from Saturday at 8:00 a.m. through Sunday at 6:00 p.m., unless the parties agree otherwise. C. The Father shall take the Children to school every day. 3. The Father shall ensure that his girlfriend is not present during any periods of custody with the Children. 4. Neither parent shall smoke in the presence of the Children, use physical discipline with the Children or make disparaging remarks concerning the other party in the presence or hearing of the Children. 4 5. For the Thanksgiving holiday in 2008, the Mother shall have custody of the Children on Thanksgiving Day and the Father shall have custody of the Children on the Friday following Thanksgiving, with the times for exchanges to be arranged by agreement between the parties. 6. The parties and counsel shall attend a follow-up custody conciliation conference in the office of the conciliator, Dawn S. Sunday, on Thursday, December 18, 2008 at 1:00 p.m. 7. 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. BY TOW COURT, J. cc: Harry M. Baturin, Esquire - Counsel for Father Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire - Counsel for Mother J/-./I -0 P C Z •6 A 61 AON 688Z IQgoP,1 3Hi. ?O 3^i-?a?-?-{13? c CRAIG E. STARNER Plaintiff VS. LORETTA M. MOORE Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 2008-5973 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 Children who are the subjects of this litigation is as follows: NAME DATE OF BIRTH CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF Cyle Starner-Moore November 3, 1994 Mother Cole Starner-Moore February 4, 2003 Mother 2. A custody conciliation conference was held on November 11, 2008, with the following individuals in attendance: the Father, Craig E. Starner, with his counsel, Harry M. Baturin, Esquire, and the Mother, Loretta M. Moore, with her counsel, Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire. 3. The parties agreed to entry of an Order in the form as attached. lU 14 , ZQQ Date Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire Custody Conciliator DEC : ? CRAIG E. STARNER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. 2008-5973 CIVIL ACTION LAW LORETTA M. MOORE Defendant IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this day of De , , , 2008, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows: 1. The parties shall submit themselves, their minor Children, and any other individuals deemed necessary by the evaluator to a custody evaluation to be performed by Stanley Schneider or other professional selected by agreement between the parties. The purpose of the evaluation shall be to obtain independent professional recommendations concerning ongoing custody arrangements which will best meet the needs of the Children. The parties shall sign any authorizations deemed necessary by the evaluator in order to obtain additional information pertaining to the parties or the Children. The Father shall pay sixty percent (60%) and the Mother shall pay forty percent (40%) of the deposit required by the evaluator and, thereafter the parties shall share all costs equally. The parties shall initiate the evaluation promptly upon obtaining sufficient funds for the required initial deposit. 2. Pending completion of the custody evaluation and further Order of Court or agreement of the parties, the prior Order of this Court dated November 18, 2008 shall continue in effect as modified by this Order. 3. In the event Cyle expresses a desire to terminate a period of partial custody with the Father earlier than the scheduled return time, the Father shall have the Child contact the Mother and, if the Mother is available, the Father shall return the Child to the Mother's custody. In light of this provision, the Mother agrees to terminate the pending Protection from Abuse proceedings on which a hearing has been scheduled for January. 4. For the Christmas Holiday in 2008, the Mother shall have custody of the Children from Christmas Eve at 1:00 p.m. through Christmas Day at 1:00 p.m., and the Father shall have custody of the Children from Christmas Day at 1:00 p.m. until December 26 at 1:00 p.m. The holiday custody arrangements set forth in this provision shall supersede and take precedence over the regular custody schedule. 5. Paragraph number 3 of the prior Order dated November 18, 2008 which prohibits contact between the Father's girlfriend and the Children, is vacated. 6. The parties and counsel shall attend a follow-up custody conciliation conference in the office of the conciliator, Dawn S. Sunday, on March 17, 2009 at 2:00 p.m. for the purpose of reviewing the custodial arrangements. 7. 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: .41arry M. Baturin, Esquire - Counsel for Father /Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire - Counsel for Mother V BY THE COURT, 'ii.: L 1 :21 d QC 310 ROZ CRAIG E. STARNER Plaintiff vs. LORETTA M. MOORE Defendant Prior Judge: J. Wesley Oler, Jr. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 2008-5973 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 Children who are the subjects of this litigation is as follows: NAME DATE OF BIRTH CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF Cyle Starner-Moore November 3, 1994 Mother Cole Starner-Moore February 4, 2003 Mother 2. A custody conciliation conference was held on December 18, 2008, with the following individuals in attendance: the Father, Craig E. Starner, with his counsel, Harry M. Baturin, Esquire, and the Mother, Loretta M. Moore, with her counsel, Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire. 3. The parties agreed to entry of an Order in the form as attached. Date Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire Custody Conciliator F[jp 2 4 2096 CRAIG E. STARNER, Petitioner V. LORETTA M. MOORE, Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. NO. 7-608- CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY / VISITATION ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this ( day PAW06.1v , 2009, upon presentation of the Petition For Custody in connection with the above-captioned matter, it is hereby ORDERED AND DECREED that the executed Stipulation dated 4 . , become an Order of Court. T' THE COURT: J. D.stribution: arry M. Baturin, Esquire, 2604 North Second St., Harrisburg, PA 17110 ??arcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire, 60 West Pomfret St., Carlisle, PA 17013 3 f 3?'aLj _.. 1 ?? ? r ' . ..:? _. _ ' i ? f.7 - ? .,? ii .:v i' _.?_1??, MAR 2 0 mg a, CRAIG E. STARNER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. 2008-5973 CIVIL ACTION LAW LORETTA M. MOORE Defendant IN CUSTODY ORDER AND NOW, this 17th day of March. 2009 , the conciliator, having determined at the conciliation conference that the parties had entered into a Custody Stipulation which was entered as a Court Order subsequent to the last Order of this Court scheduling a follow-up custody conciliation conference, hereby relinquishes jurisdiction. FOR THE COURT, Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire Custody Conciliator r+a =lc ?, _ cry CRAIG E. STARNER, Plaintiff/Respondent V. LORETTA M. MOORE, Defendant/Petitioner IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW 2008-5973 CIVIL TERM IN CUSTODY PETITION FOR MODIFICATION OF CUSTODY AND NOW comes the Defendant/Petitioner, Loretta M. Moore, by her attorneys, Irwin & McKnight, P.C., and presents the following Petition for Modification of Custody. 1. The Petitioner is Loretta M. Moore, an adult individual residing at 1550 Williams Grove Road, Lot 144, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055. 2. The Respondent is Craig E. Starner, an adult individual residing at 921 Gettysburg Pike, Apartment E, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania 17325. 3. The parties are the natural parents of two (2) minor children, namely Cyle Starner-Moore, born November 3, 1994, and Cole Starner-Moore, born February 4, 2003. 4. The parties were governed by a custody Order of Court dated December 7, 2008, a copy of which is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit "A". 5. On January 20, 2009, the parties executed a Custody Stipulation which was entered as an Order of Court dated March 2, 2009, a copy of which is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit «B„ 6. The Petitioner, Loretta M. Moore, currently has primary physical custody of Cole Starner-Moore. The Respondent, Craig E. Starner, currently has primary physical custody of Cyle Starner-Moore. The parties have shared legal custody of said minor children. 7. The Petitioner desires that she be granted shared physical custody Cyle Starner-Moore and primary physical custody of Cole Starner-Moore. 8. The best interests and permanent welfare of the minor children requires that the Court grant the Petitioner's request as set forth above. WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Loretta M. Moore, respectfully requests that she be granted shared physical custody of Cyle Starner-Moore and primary physical custody of Cole Starner- Moore as provided herein. By: Respectfully submitted, IRWIN & McKNIGHT, P.C. A. c fight, III, Esquire . for 1 'ntiff 60 WesLY-dinfrel Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013-3222 (717) 249-2353 Supreme Court I. D. No. 25476 Date: March 24, 2009 EXHIBIT "A" 4 200 CRAIG E. STARNER Plaintiff vs. LORETTA M. MOORE Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 2008-5973 CIVIL ACTION LAW IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 31041 day of IeC . , 2008, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows: 1. The parties shall submit themselves, their minor Children, and any other individuals deemed necessary by the evaluator to a custody evaluation to be performed by Stanley Schneider or other professional selected by agreement between the parties. The purpose of the evaluation shall be to obtain independent professional recommendations concerning ongoing custody arrangements which will best meet the needs of the Children. The parties shall sign any authorizations deemed necessary by the evaluator in order to obtain additional information pertaining to the parties or the Children. The Father shall pay sixty percent (60%) and the Mother shall pay forty percent (40%) of the deposit required by the evaluator and, thereafter the parties shall share all costs equally. The parties shall initiate the evaluation promptly upon obtaining sufficient funds for the required initial deposit. 2. Pending completion of the custody evaluation and further Order of Court or agreement of the parties, the prior Order of this Court dated November 18, 2008 shall continue in effect as modified by this Order. 3. In the event Cyle expresses a desire to terminate a period of partial custody with the Father earlier than the scheduled return time, the Father shall have the Child contact the Mother and, if the Mother is available, the Father shall return the Child to the Mother's custody. In light of this provision, the Mother agrees to terminate the pending Protection from Abuse proceedings on which a hearing has been scheduled for January. 4. For the Christmas Holiday in 2008, the Mother shall have custody of the Children from Christmas Eve at 1:00 p.m. through Christmas Day at 1:00 p.m., and the Father shall have custody of the Children from Christmas Day at 1:00 p.m. until December 26 at 1:00 p.m. The holiday custody arrangements set forth in this provision shall supersede and take precedence over the regular custody schedule. 5. Paragraph number 3 of the prior Order dated November 18, 2008 which prohibits contact between the Father's girlfriend and the Children, is vacated. 6. The parties and counsel shall attend a follow-up custody conciliation conference in the office of the conciliator, Dawn S. Sunday, on March 17, 2009 at 2:00 p.m. for the purpose of reviewing the custodial arrangements. 7. 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: Harry M. Baturin, Esquire - Counsel for Father Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire - Counsel for Mother RECEIVED JAN 0 ? 200'' IRWIN & MCKNIC CAIN OFFICES TRUE COPY In Testimony w1'1--n-c;,, and seaI of s,* ' ' ti Th1 ....3 .. day e D • i?'.. ?ntJ !.. a ;r', se-? my band it Carlisle, Pa. yf. ec...... BY THE COURT, CRAIG E. STARNER Plaintiff vs. LORETTA M. MOORE Defendant Prior Judge: J. Wesley Oler, Jr. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 2408-5973 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 Children who are the subjects of this litigation is as follows: NAME DATE OF BIRTH CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF Cyle Starner-Moore November 3, 1994 Mother Cole Starner-Moore February 4, 2003 Mother 2. A custody conciliation conference was held on December 18, 2008, with the following individuals in attendance: the Father, Craig E. Starner, with his counsel, Harry M. Baturin, Esquire, and the Mother, Loretta M. Moore, with her counsel, Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire. 3. The parties agreed to entry of an Order in the form as attached. 1--I>- Z23/L7 Date Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire C Custody Conciliator EXHIBIT "B" J NIY? 1 b?tl7 tl l: l b F'M CRAIG: E. STARNER, Petitioner V. I.,ORE,rTA M. MOORE, Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. NO. CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY / VISITATION .AND NOW, this day , 2009, upon presentation of the Petition For Custody in connection with the above-captioned matter, it is hereby ORDERED AND DECREED that the executed Stipulation dated , become an Order of Court. BY THE COURT: J. P. 02 Distribution: luny M. Buturin, Esquire, 2604 North Second St., Harrisburg, PA 17110 Marais A, McKnight, 111, Esquire, 60 West Pomfivt St., Carlisle, PA 17013 J HN- 1 b-107 "1:1b PM CRAIG E. STARNER, Petitioner V. LORETTA M. MOORS, Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. NO. CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY / VISITATION AND NOW, this day of , 2009, comes the Petitioner, CRAIG E. STARNER, by and through his attorneys, the Law Offices of BATURIN & BATURIN, and riles this Petition ror Custody and respectfully represents as follows: 1. The Petitioner is, CRAIG E. STARNER, an adult individual, suijuris. who currently resides at 921 Gettysburg Pike, Apt. E, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055. 2. The Respondent is LORETTA M. MOORE, an adult individual, suiJuric, who currently resides at 1550 Williams Grove Road, #144, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 11055. 3. Petitioner and Respondent were never married. 4. The Petitioner and Respondent are the Natural Parents of two (2) children as rollowc: C.YLE STARNER-MOORE,fourteen (14) years old, born !November 3, 1494. and COLE STARNER MOORS, rive (5)years old, born February 4, 2003, P. 03 Said children arc the subject of this Custody Petition. JAN-16-09 01:16 PM 5. The aforementioned children are presently in the physical custody of their Natural mother, the Respondent herein, and she resides at 1550 Williams Grove Road, #144, Mechanicsburg. Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17055. 6. The parties hereto, intending to be legally bound hereby, covenant and agree that (lie Natural Pathsr and Natural Mother shall have shared legal custody of the parties' children as herchibefore mentioned. The parties agree that the Natural Father shall have partial physical custody of Cole Starner-Moore on weekends at the time frames as set forth in tite prior Custody Order and shareel physical custody of Cyle Starner-Moore and Natural Mother shall have primary physical custody of Cole Starner-Moore as hereinbefore mentioned in said prior Custody Order, and the Natural Mother, Respondent herein, shall have shared physical custody ol'C'yle Starner-Moore as sct forth as below: ai Natural Father/Petitioner shall have Cyle Starner-Moore during the school week; b) Natural Mother/Respondent shall have Cyle Starner-Moore weekends as agreed upon by the parties, at a time agreed upon by the parties. C) in the event that Cyle Starner-Moore would decide at any time that he would like to stay overnight with his Natural Mother/Respondent, Natural Father/Petitioner agrees to allow Cyle Starner-Moore do so. d) At all times that either party has physical custody of said child, Cyle Starner-Moore, the parries, to the best of their ability, shall shield and P. 04 protect the child tirom any third party's use of alcohol; and 01:16 PM c) At all times that either party has physical custody of said child, Cyle Starner-Moore the parties, to the beat of their ability, shall refrain from making derogatory remarks in front of the child. I;' Additional terms shall bo included as per the attached letter from Irwin and McKnight Law Offices, if attached and applicable. '1. Neither Petitioner nor Respondent have participated as a party or witness, or in another capacity, in other litigation concerning the custody of said children, H. Petitioner has no information of a custody proceeding concerning the said children pending; in a court of this Commonwealth. 9. The best interest and permanent welfare of the said child, Cyle Starner-Moore wi I1 be served by granting the relief requested because: a; The Petitioner is well able to adequately provide for the continuing health, educational needs and general welfare of the said children; b The Petitioner is well able to adequately provide the said child with a proper and wholesome environment, physically, emotionally, psychologically and socially, within which to live; and c) It is the best interest of the said child, Cyle Starner-Moore generally that primary physical and shared legal custody be granted to the Natural Father, CRAIG E. STARNER, Petitioner herein. 10. T)c Petitioner knows of no other person or party to the within proceeding who has physical custody of said children or who claims to have custody or visitation rights with respect to them. JRN-16-09 01:17 PM 11.. This Order of Court is entered pursuant to an agreement of the parties hereto. The parties may modify the provisions of this Order by mutual agreement. In the absence of mutual agre:cment, the terms of this Order of Court shall control. 12. It is the intent of the parties hereto to become and remain legally bound by the nnUual promises and covenants herein contained. 13. This Agreement shall be construed under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 14. It is further understood that this Stipulation, is to go into effect immediately. 15. This Stipulation is entered into pursuant to the mutual understanding and agmemcnt of the parties hereto and it is the intent of both to become and remain legally bound by the mutual promises and covenants herein contained. 16. The parties hereto declare that each of them fully understands the covenants and provisions contained in this Agreement. The parties acknowledge having the opportunity to rccci%,c counsel :end advice from an attorney of his or her choice regarding all of his or her legal rights. duties, obligations and liabilities in connection with, or resulting from, this Agreement. Each panty has executed this Agreement freely and voluntarily. 17. A Stipulation to the above Petition for Custody is signed by the parties hereto and is attached to this Petition for Custody. 18. This Stipulation shall remain in full force and effect unless and until terminated under and pursuant to the terms of this Stipulation. The failure of either party to insist upon strict performance of any of the provisions of this Stipulation shall not be construed as a waiver of any P. 06 suhsequont default of the same or similar nature. JHN-16-177 U1 : 1 r Furl 19. It, is understood that this Stipulation is to be entered of record in the Office of the Prothonotary of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, along with the attached Order of Court. W11ERETORE, the Petitioner, CRAIG E. STARNER, respectfully requests that this [Ionorable C'oun, enter the Stipulation as an Order of Court. Respectfully submitted, BATURIN & BATURIN By: Harry M. Baturin, Esquire Attorney ID #83006 2604 North Second Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 234-2427 Attorney for Petitioner P. 07 JHN-1b-w*30 81:18 PM 1 VERIFY THAT THE STATEMENTS MADE IN THIS PETITION ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, BELIEF, AND INFORMATION. I UNDERSTAND THAT FALSE STATEMENTS HEREIN ARE MADE SUBJECT TO THE PENALTIES OI" 18 PA.C.S. §4904 RELATING TO UNSWORN FALSIFICATION TO AUITIORITIES, P.68 Dated: (SEA[.,) CRAIG E. STARNER Natural Father/Petitioner JAN-16-09 01:18 PM CRAIG E. STARNER, Petitioner V. I,ORF-I°TA M. MOORE, Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. NO. CIVIL ACTION -LAW CUSTODY / VISITATION AND NOW, this _ day of , 2009, comes the Petitioner,: CRAIG E. STARNER, and Respondent, LORETTA M. MOORS, and each agree to the following Stipulation for Custody: . The Petitioner is, CRAIG E. STARNER, an adult individual, sidjuris, who currently resides at 92 1 Gettysburg Pike, Apt. E, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County. Pennsylvania 17055. 2. The Respondent is LORETTA M. MOORE, an adult individual, SMi jtrris, who cttn-viUly resides at 1550 Williams Grove Road, #144, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17055. Petitioner and Respondent were never married. 4. I'he Petitioner and Respondent are the Natural Parents of two (2) children as follows: CYLE STARNER-MOORE,fourteen (14) years old, born Novomber 3, 1994, and COLE STARNER-MOORE, five (5)years old, born Februtty 4, 2003. r . 17 7 Said children arc the subject of this Custody Petition. 01:18 PM r. in 5. The aforementioned children are ptnsently in the physical custody of their Natural mother, the Respondent herein, and she resides at 1550 Williams Grove Road, #144, Mimhunicshurg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17055. 6. The parties hereto, intending to be legally bound hereby, covenant and agree that the N.ItUnal Father and Natural Mother shall have shared legal custody of the parties' children as hereinbetbrc mentioned. The parties agree that the Natural Father shall have partial physical custody of Colc Starncr-Moore on weekends at the time frames as set forth in the prior Custody Order and shared physical custody of Cyle Starner-Moore and Natural Mother shall have primary physical custody of Cole Starner-Moore as hereinbefore mentioned in said prior Custody Order, and the Natural Mother, Respondent herein, shall have shared physical custody of Cylc Stunner-Moore as set forth as below: a} Natural Father/Petitioner shall have C'yle Starner-Moore during the school week; b; Natural Mother/Respondent shall have Cyle Starner-Moore weekends as agreed upon by the parties, at a time agreed upon by the parties. C) In the event that Cyle Starner-Moore would decide at any time that he would like to stay overnight with his Natural Mother/Rcspondent, Natural Father/Petitioner agrees to allow Cyle Starner-Moore do so. dj At all times that either party has physical custody of said child. Cyle Starner-Moore, the parties, to the best of their ability, shall shield and protect the child from any third party's use of alcohol; and JAN-16-09 01:18 PM Viii 0 At all times that either party has physical custody of said child, Cyle Starner-Moore the parties, to the best of their ability, shall refrain from making derogatory remarks in front of the child. 0 Additional terms shall be included as per the attached letter from Irwin and McKnight Law Offices, if attached and applicable. Neither Petitioner nor Respondent have participated as a party or witness. or in another capacity, in other litigation concerning the custody of said children. 8. Petitioner has no information of a custody proceeding concerning the said children pending in a court of this Commonwealth. 9, The best interest and permanent welfare of the said child, Cyle Starner-Moore will be served by granting the relief requested because: a) The Petitioner is well able to adequately provide for the continuing health. educational needs and general welfare of the said children; b) The Petitioner is well able to adequately provide the said child with a proper and wholesome environment, physically, emotionally, psychologically and socially, within which to live; and c) it is the best interest of the said child, Cylc Starrier-Moore generally that primary physical and shared legal custody be granted to the Natural Father, CRAIG E. STARNER, Petitioner herein. 10, The Petitioner knows of no other person or party to the within proceeding who has phpsiCal custody of said children or who claims to have custody or visitation rights with respect to then. SAN-16-09 01:19 PM 11. This Order of Court is entered pursuant to an agreement of the parties hereto. The parties may modify the provisions of this Order by mutual agreement. In the absence of mulual ltUrceinent, the terms of this Order of Court shall control, 12. It is the intent of the parties hereto to become and remain legally bound by the mutual promises and covenants herein contained. 13. This Agreement shall be construed under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 14. It is further understood that this Stipulation is to go into effect immediately. 15. This Stipulation is entered into pursuant to the mutual understanding and agreement of the parties hereto and it is the intent of both to become and remain legally bound by the mutual pm niscs and covenants herein contained. 16. The parties hereto declare that each of them fully understands the covenants and provisions contained in this Agreement. The parties acknowledge having the opportunity to receive counsel and advice from an attorney of his or her choice regarding all of his or her legal rights, duties, obligations and liabilities in connection with, or resulting from, this Agreement. Each parly has executed this Agreement freely and voluntarily. 17. A Stipulation to the above Petition for Custody is signed by the parties hereto and is attached to this Petition for Custody. h'. 1L 18. This Stipulation shall remain in full force and effect unless and until terminated J HN- 1 6-109 01:19 PM under and pursuant to the terms of this Stipulation. The failure of either party to insist upon strict pcrrormance of any of the provisions of this Stipulation shall not be construed as a waiver of any suhsequent default of the same or similar nature. 19, It is understood that this Stipulation is to be entered of record in the Office of the Prothonotary of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, along with the attached Order of Court. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Petitioner and Respondent have set their respective hands acid seals Ilio day and year first above written. SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF: _ (SEAL) CRAIG E. STARNER, Petitioners (SEAL) P. 13 LORETTA M. MOORE, Respondent VERIFICATION The foregoing document is based upon information which has been gathered by my counsel and myself in the preparation of this action. I have read the statements made in this document and they are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein made are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S.A. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities Date: 2009 CRAIG E. STARNER, Plaintiff/Respondent V. LORETTA M. MOORE, Defendant/Petitioner IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW 2008-5973 CIVIL TERM IN CUSTODY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire, hereby certify that a copy of attached Petition was served upon the following by depositing a true and correct copy of the same in the United States mail, First Class, postage prepaid in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, on the date referenced below and addressed as follows: Harry M. Baturin, Esq. Baturin & Baturin 2604 North Second Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 IRWIN & By: , P.C. III, Esquire 60 West/Pomfret`5treet Carlisle,/ PA 17013 (717) 249-2353 Supreme Court I.D. No. 25476 Date: March 26, 2009 rr, CRAIG E. STARNER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. 2008-5973 CIVIL ACTION LAW LORETTA M. MOORE IN CUSTODY DEFENDANT ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, Friday, April 03, 2009 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 - Wednesday, April 29, 2009 __ at 10:30 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 A" 2#89 APR -3 PM 12: 31 C CO e)q CRAIG E. STARNER, ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Petitioner CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. vs. CASE NO.: 0-73 LORETTA M. MOORE, . Respondent ) CIVIL LAW - CUSTODY PETITION FOR CONTEMPT AND NOW, comes the Petitioner, CRAIG E. STARNER, Pro Se, and respectfully sets forth the Petitioner's Petition for Contempt and state as follows: 1. The Petitioner is, CRAIG E. STARNER, an adult individual, sui juris, who bog ParK.Zb%,& or. currently resides at , Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055. 2. The Respondent is LORETTA M. MOORE, an adult individual, sui juris, who currently resides at 1550 Williams Grove Road, 4144, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17055. 3. The Petitioner and Respondent are the natural parents of two children: CYLE STARNER-MOORE, fourteen (14) years old, born November 3, 1994, and COLE STARNER-MOORE, five (C years old, born February 4, 2003. Said minor children are the subject of this Custody Complaint. 4. The parties share legal custody of the parties' minor children, CYLE STARNER- MOORE and COLE STARNER-MOORE and Natural Father has partial custody/visitation every of Cole Starner and Physical Custody of Cyle Starner. 5. Since birth, the said minor children have lived at the following address with the following persons: DATE ADDRESS CUSTODY Present 1550 Williams Grove Road, #144 Natural Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Mother and 607, t?u-rY--k- 6 e -V"?r- Natural Me rN,,,...;? s o S-? Father 7. The relationship of the Petitioner in the Custody action to subject minor children is that of Natural Father. 8. The relationship of the Respondent in the Custody action to subject minor children is that of Natural Mother. 9. The original Order of Court, states, in part, that Natural Father is to have visitation of Cole Starner every Wednesday and every other Weekend, subject to the additional terms of the Order and Physical Custody of Cyle Starner. 10. Contrary to, and in violation of, the Order, when Petitioner notified Respondent that he was going to exercise his visitation pursuant to the terms of the Order (specifically at the specified times and currently on his own), Respondent did not allow the subject children to visit with him, their Natural Father. 2 11. In addition, contrary to, and in violation of, the subject Order of Court, the Respondent did not allow the children their visit with their Natural Father as follows: #14C CA- I V1 Z" OI Cole- Wws x,o-? ytiu, ?o wee U V%W 2.1.rz 0. tr Lour, Or?c 2 ?? ? bvu_ #- Ape;l i Zooq 4i ?ci4? Broke- @o? ??- mrae r v s,r••? ?4 e +rPo?a?c? i2aH..a+a[ s ; v??'•o+-1 ?? ('e..a 1,? ???, ?i;? ??e? . ?t s? zoos ?gd b ?,cre.?? O? Mo.tfi tAerj 2, Zn? 4 wig ?? p c1c ?p c.tt o?s ?u °? l ` l w-4-s 4C ny UrS;?1-ro>. Q,+n? wks ?-oiG Na yov wail ,Naj 1•.. e?Q?.r.? ?..:.,?.. e??AO.n'?e. re?vsa V ?5 i ?. 7f ?^? w ?'?. ?. y?v,r.q? ors . Ar. 4uati. .a? c t?o.- n?a P? cll P&~Yg 1 U o Were calfd J,0 y ^^.c . zM, Cyst i S a,, 6p 1 ?V w?M4. a,,r -K- SG +1 w`??- ?u AL C`o.,? ?,,wL. ?+- '?..,a, c.? C.?-i?? w l CYk ? 5?? \i ?.S n,e?- beer? 2??vc? . ?. 5 ? G?ie ? I?ecY?cw?. ? o-Sb ?, r? r?'???a. S??\ o?C ?y aP''` )z S 1 ? uJ1~ ? i a ,Lw J ?: ??G? b?a?ac o? (!1,,? st-o fly f . 5`°+ WHEREFORE, the Petitioner, CRAIG E. STARNER, respectfully requests that this Honorable Court grant the relief requested, and any other relief deemed appropriate, and enter an order holding the Respondent, LORETTA M. MOORE, in contempt of Court, and enter a final order Ordering that the Petitioner be granted additional physical custody as appropriate. i r+? g ?.?K'?r1 Co-?? -vrL'tY? o?ov'C $? ^`-? l.0'? Ana ?.,c.g .6`& MUO 6ec,- se J "c 4- o i'dt! . `t s CO ?y ? ?,.? ? ??• ?e? ? ?? o.? ?•--?.? _T_. w ? 5 ? W? ?' v.: "^ " ? `°'e? o rte- . ?`.,? \ wag F ?lo Se e_ Cml? Z o,r?S ;tpy ( A4 GA Re?a,m o? Cc??e C; R P^^ ? ?- 0?-k.e C1?,?,ce,r? . w?-? ,c.,?c?:? ?-o?-?i4 -?.? e??.t,? ? r•cr ??`'? 1.:?-s?c.-? ??cou? v p? L"e?tx`slt. 3 Respectfully submitted, BY Dated: I g, 2=5 Petitioner VERIFICATION I VERIFY THAT THE STATEMENTS MADE IN THIS PETITION FOR CONTEMPT FOR DISOBEDIENCE OF CUSTODY ORDER ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, BELIEF, AND INFORMATION. I UNDERSTAND THAT FALSE STATEMENTS HEREIN ARE MADE SUBJECT TO THE PENALTIES OF 18 PA.C.S. § 4909 RELATING TO UNSWORN FALSIFICATION TO AUTHORITIES. G E. STARNER 5 BLED--()ICE OF THE P'? vx`CTV 2009 APR 14 PPI !: 32 ,, ,rv i4114S #- 4 /?, ? ? fl# ??1t 3 a 3 A3 CRAIG E. STARNER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. 2008-5973 CIVIL ACTION LAW LORETTA M. MOORS IN CUSTODY DEFENDANT ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, Tuesday, April 21, 2009 _,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 Thursday, May 14, 2009 at 12:00 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/ 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 RLFU-•J;==fC`C OF THE FR ff =a:'?}TARY 2009 APR 22 PM 2: 16 MAY 0 8 2000 4 CRAIG E. STARNER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA VS. 2008-5973 CIVIL ACTION LAW LORETTA M. MOORE Defendant IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 121 day of ? "t , 2009, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is order id and directed as follows: 1. The prior Orders of this Court in this matter are vacated and replaced with this Order. 2.. The Father, Craig E. Starner, and the Mother, Loretta M. Moore, shall have shared legal custody of Cyle Starner-Moore, born November 3, 1994, and Cole Starner-Moore, born February 4, 2003. Major decisions concerning the Children including, but not necessarily limited to, their 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 each Child's best interest. Neither party shall impair the other party's rights to shared legal custody of the Children. Neither party shall attempt to alienate the affections of the Children from the other party. Each party shall notify the other of any activity or circumstance concerning the Children 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. The parties shall have physical custody of the Children in accordance with the following schedule: A. The Father shall have custody of the Children on alternating weekends from Friday at 6:00 p.m. through Sunday at 8:00 p.m. B. The Father shall have custody of the Children every Wednesday from 5:00 p.m. until 9:00 p.m. and on Thursdays immediately preceding the Mother's weekend periods of custody from 5:00 p.m. until 9:00 p.m. In the event either or both Children express a desire to stay overnight during the midweek period of custody with the Father, the Mother shall not unreasonably withhold her consent. The Father shall be responsible to transport the Child or Children to school the following morning. F,C :c Wd z I I' ooz At7viof ,' ', 1; Id ! -p i E? 3v C. The Mother shall have custody of the Children at all times not otherwise specified for the Father in this Order. 4. Each parent shall be entitled to have custody of the Children for two (2) nonconsecutive weeks each summer upon providing at least thirty (30) days advance notice to the other parent. Each nonconsecutive week may include up to seven (7) days and six (6) overnights. Vacation weeks under this provision shall be scheduled to include that party's regular weekend period of custody. The parent providing notice first under this provision shall be entitled to preference on his or her selection of vacation dates. In the event either party intends to remove the Children from his or her residence for an overnight period or longer for a period of vacation custody, that parent shall provide advance notice to the other parent of the address and telephone number where the Children can be contacted. The non-custodial parent shall be entitled to have reasonable telephone contact with the Children. 5. The parties shall make arrangements for Cyle to continue in therapy with a counselor as soon as possible after insurance coverage is available. 6. All exchanges of custody under this Order shall take place at the Rutter's store on Route 15 in Dillsburg, unless otherwise agreed between the parties. 7. The Father shall return Cyle's personal items as indicated on the Child's list provided at the conciliation conference, within five (5) days of the date of the conciliation conference. 8. All civil and cooperative exchanges of custody under this Order and any communications concerning the Children shall not constitute a violation of the Protection from Abuse Order currently in effect. 9. In the event a Child or the Children express to either parent a desire for a change in custody, the parties shall make arrangements for the Child or the Children to address the issue with the parties in the counseling process. 10. The Mother shall notify the Father promptly any time either Child has two or more days of absence from school in a given week. 11. The Mother shall promptly notify the Father of all extracurricular activities and school related events involving the Children in sufficient time to enable the Father to participate or attend the activities or events. 12. Each party shall provide advance notice to the other parent of any intention to relocate his or her residence and provide information pertaining to the address and new telephone number. 13. Neither party shall do or say anything which may estrange the Children from the other parent, injure the opinion of the Children as to the other parent, or hamper the free and natural development of the Children's love and respect for the other parent. Both parties shall ensure that third parties having contact with the Children comply with this provision. 14. The parties shall strictly adhere to the exchange times designated in this Order for transfers of custody. 15. 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: "Craig E. Starner - Father /Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire - Counsel for Mother 'IT ??tLid, BY THE COURT, CRAIG E. STARNER Plaintiff vs. LORETTA M. MOORE Defendant Prior Judge: J. Wesley Oler, Jr. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 2008-5973 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 Children who are the subjects of this litigation is as follows: NAME Cyle Starner-Moore Cole Starner-Moore DATE OF BIRTH November 3, 1994 February 4, 2003 CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF Mother Mother 2. A custody conciliation conference was held on April 29, 2009, with the following individuals in attendance: the Mother, Loretta M. Moore, with her counsel, Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire, and the Father, Craig E. Starner, who appeared at the conference without counsel. Both the Mother's Petition for Modification and the Father's Petition for Contempt were addressed at the conference so that the separate conciliation conference scheduled for May 14, 2009 at 12:00 noon is no longer necessary. The parties agreed to entry of an Order in the form as attached. CCU ` Date Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire Custody Conciliator CRAIG E. STARNER, ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Petitioner CUMERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. VS. CASE NO.: `Z,o a$ - (ter 7 3 LORETTA M. MOORE, Respondent ) CIVIL LAW - CUSTODY PETITION FOR CONTEMPT AND NOW, comes the Petitioner, CRAIG E. STARNER, Pro Se, and respectfully sets for the Petitioner's Petition for Contempt and state as follows: 1. The Petitioner is, CRAIG E. STARNER, an adult individual, sui juris, who currently resides at 602 Park Ridge Drive, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055. 2. The Respondent is, LORETTA M. MOORE, an adult individual, sui juris, who currently resides at 1550 Williams Grove Road, #144, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17055. 3. The Petitioner and Respondent are the natural parents of two children: CYLE STARNER-MOORE, fourteen (14) years old, born November 3, 1994, and COLE STARNER-MOORE, six (6) years old, born February 4, 2003. 4. The parties have shared legal custody/visitation of the parties' minor children, CYLE STARNER-MOORE and COLE STARNER-MOORE. 5. Since birth, the said minor children have lived at the following address with the following persons: 1 DATE ADDRESS CUSTODY Present 1550 Williams Grove Road, #144 Natural Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Mother and 602 Park Ridge Drive Natural Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Father 6. The Relationship of the Petitioner in the Custody action to subject minor children is that of Natural Father. 7. The relationship of the Respondent in the Custody action to subject minor children is that of Natural Mother. 8. The Order of Court, states, in part, that Natural Father is to have visitation of Cole Starner and Cyle Starner every Wednesday, including overnight, every other Thursday, including overnights, and every other Weekend, from Friday at 6pm until Sunday at 8pm. 9. Contrary to, and in violation of, the Order, when Petitioner notified Respondent that he was going to exercise his visitation pursuant to the terms of the Order (specifically at the specified times and currently on his own), Respondent did not allow the subject children to visit with him, their Natural Father. 10. In addition, contrary to, and in violation of, the subject Order of Court, the Respondent did not allow the children their visit with their Natural Father as follows: 2 a. April 29, 2009, on the same day of the conciliation conference, Loretta M. Moore was in contempt, again, due to it being clearly stated that no derogatory remarks were to be made in front of the children. Also, it was clearly stated that neither party shall say anything which may estrange the children from the other parent or injure the opinion of the children as to the other parent. When I went to pick up my children for my Wednesday visitation at the Rutter's on Route 15 in Dillsburg, Loretta Moore started yelling in front of the children calling me a loser, a child and women abuser and other derogatory remarks that is not appropriate to repeat on this document. b. April 30-May 1, 2009, its states in the order, the mother shall notify the father promptly anytime either child has two or more days of absence from school in a given week. Upon pulling my children's attendance records at the end of the school year, not only did I notice a pattern of absenteeism for Cyle Starner, I also saw that Cyle missed school Thursday, April 30`x, 2009 and Friday, May 1, 2009, and was never notified by Loretta Moore. c. May 6, 2009, I called to speak with my son, Cole, to see if he wanted to spend the night that day, not only was I refused the right to speak to my son, I then received a phone call and a voicemail from him stating that if I said please to his mother, she would allow him to come see me on my court specified day. Also was told in message by Loretta that I had three minutes to call her back or I would not have my son that day, which is my court ordered day. 3 d. May 7, 2009, I received a phone call from Loretta, stating I was not allowed to take Cole on a trip to New Jersey for my weekend visitation. We were to go to the Cape May Zoo and stay overnight at my fiancd's parent's house. My son had been looking forward to this trip and had been talking about it for weeks. She was informed ahead of time of the trip and said that it was inappropriate behavior. She then had my son call me and tell me that he did not want to go, because he was afraid to stay with my fiancd's parents. I did not understand why, because he has been around them many times and has always been okay. We cancelled the trip and I questioned my son that weekend, why he did not want to go. He got upset and said he did want to go, but my mom told me that she did not like it. He said my mom made me call, because she did not like it. The order states that I only have to notify her if I take the children overnight during vacation custody, and this was my normal weekend to get my children. e. It also states in the order that 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 shall consult with him or her as soon as possible, saying that, my fiancd saw my oldest son, Cyle, at the store, and informed me not only did he have a splint on his right arm, he told her that he broke his wrist. I then called my son as soon as I found out, and asked him if he was okay and why I was not notified. His comment, I did not 4 know I had to tell you. Come to find out the injury had occurred the week before and again was not notified by his mother of the injury to my son. f. From the time of the court order to the present, I have gotten repeated phone calls from Loretta, about the children, she then branches off into things about my personal life and when I state this has nothing to do with the children, she starts making derogatory remarks to me, in front of my children. I know this because I can hear my children in the background. g. May 31-June 1, 2009, On Sunday, May 31 s`, 2009, at 3 pm, Loretta contacted me by phone and asked me if I would buy clothes for my oldest son, Cyle, and said that they were for his graduation, I stated to her that I had just paid my child support and did not have the funds available that quickly. I then asked her when the graduation was and she would not tell me and started making derogatory comments in front of my children, because I could not produce the clothes on her demand. On Monday, June 1 s`, 2009, I contacted the Mechanicsburg Middle School, to find out when Cyle's graduation was, to my surprise it was that evening, and again I was never notified. According to the court order, the mother shall promptly notify the father of all extracurricular activities and school related events, involving the children in sufficient time to enable the father to participate or attend the activities or events. So again, Loretta violated the order by not notifying me of the event. At the event that evening, when my fiance and I walked into the auditorium, she approached me and sarcastically clapped her hands and said, "It's good to see that you made it," and then 5 walked away. So I would take that sarcastic comment as a malicious act, because she had no intention of informing me of the event. h. June 4-June 5, 2009, On Thursday, June, 02009, Loretta contacted me in regards to getting my youngest son, Cole, in the morning of June 5`", because she had a prior engagement. On Friday, June 5 h, 2009, I picked my son up at the time arranged, and his mother would be in contact with me, to get his belongings to me, due to it being my weekend with my children. At 2:38 pm, Loretta called my cell phone, letting me know that his belongings were ready to be picked up. She then started complaining about the activities that I had planned for my son that weekend; she was notified in advance and was given the phone number and address of the campground we were going to for the weekend. She then outright refused to give my Cole's clothes, medication, and fishing rod, that she was notified in advance that was needed for the trip. Loretta then stated that she wanted Cole returned, and that I could get him back at 6 pm. I therefore asked my son if he wanted to go home for two hours and then return and he stated that he did not want to leave. Cole then called his mothers house phone, no one answered, so he left a message on the machine that he did not want to come home at that time. I then tried calling Loretta several times during the next two hours, on the house and cell phones, about getting my son's belongings. She still refused to give me Cole's belongings so Cole called and spoke with his mother, and he then asked her for his things. She still refused, but then said if I wanted 6 them I would have to come get them and so I asked her where she wanted to meet. She then said that she was not going anywhere, and I would have to come and get them. I said okay we will be over and she said, "You can't just come over here, Mr. PFA." I then told her that I would see her at the return time of my visitation, which is 8 pm on Sunday. Not only did she out right refuse to give me my son's belongings, she made threats with the PFA, when all I was trying to do is get Cole's belongings. Because of this incident, we had to postpone our trip for a day, causing me to lose the money I had paid for Friday night, because I had to go out and buy him clothes, socks, and underwear. I feel that this was immature behavior, because she was trying to give me a hard time because of jealousy over my new engagement, but this did not hurt me, it hurt my son. Due to him once again looking forward to this trip and losing a day of it. My children are not a weapon and I am tired of them being put in the middle and hurt, due to our indifferences. *Witness statements are available for every incident listed above upon request* 7 WHEREFORE, the Petitioner, CRAIG E. STARNER, respectfully requests that this Honorable Court grant the relief requested, and any other relief deemed appropriate, and enter an order holding the Respondent, LORETTA M. MOORE, in contempt of Court, and enter a final order, Ordering that the petitioner be granted addition physical custody and/or primary custody. Respectfully Submitted, By; 'g tamer, Pro Se Dated: Guy Petitioner 8 VERIFICATION I VERIFY THAT THE STATEMENTS MADE IN THIS PETITION FOR CONTEMPT FOR DISOBEDIENCE OF THE CUSTODY ORDER ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, BELIEF, AND INFORMATION. I UNDERSTAND THAT FALSE STATEMENTS HEREIN ARE MADE SUBJECT TO THE PENALTIES OF 18 PA.C.S § 4909 RELATING TO UNSWORN FALSIFICATION TO AUTHORITIES. G E. STARNER 9 HLED -OF-RCE OF THE PFi) QlO'ARY, 2009 JUN -8 P8 3: 34 Pd.* ?h CRAIG E. STARNER PLAINTIFF V. LORETTA M. MOORE DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA • II 2008-5973 CIVIL ACTION LAW IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, Thursday, June 11, 2009 , upon consideration of the attacl it is hereby directed that parties and their respective counsel appear before Dawn S. Sunday, Esq at 39 West Main Street, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 on Tuesday, July 07, 2009 for a Pre-Hearing Custody Conference. At such conference, an effort will be made to resolve the i if this cannot be accomplished, to define and narrow the issues to be heard by the court, and to ent, order. Failure to appear at the conference may provide grounds for entry of a temporary or permai Complaint, the conciliator, at 3:00 PM sues in dispute; or r into a temporary ent order. The court hereby directs the parties to furnish any and all existing Protection from A use orders, Special Relief orders, and Custody orders to the conciliator 48 hours prior to scheduled hear ng. FOR THE COURT. By: /s/ Dawn S. Sunda Es q. Custody Conciliator The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County is required by law to comply with Disabilites Act of 1990. For information about accessible facilities and reasonable acc available to disabled individuals having business before the court, please contact our office. must be made at least 72 hours prior to any hearing or business before the court. You must conference or hearing. the Americans arrangements d the scheduled 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 OF ICE 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 Fib ED-4,; } ;-3C.IF OF THE NAR ?n Y 2009 JUG t I PM 2: 26 Pc?f L?'rPba ,? - //' D r - ")?, A".,& Z? CRAIG E. STARNER, ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Petitioner CUMERLAND COUNTY, PENNA. VS. CASE NO.:? 73 LORETTA M. MOORE, Respondent ) CIVIL LAW - CUSTODY PETITION FOR CONTEMPT AND NOW, comes the Petitioner, CRAIG E. STARNER, Pro Se, and respectfully sets for the Petitioner's Petition for Contempt and state as follows: 1. The Petitioner is, CRAIG E. STARNER, an adult individual, sui juris, who currently resides at 602 Park Ridge Drive, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055. 2. The Respondent is, LORETTA M. MOORE, an adult individual, sui juris, who currently resides at 1550 Williams Grove Road, #144, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, 17055. 3. The Petitioner and Respondent are the natural parents of two children: CYLE STARNER-MOORE, fourteen (14) years old, born November 3, 1994, and COLE STARNER MOORE, six (6) years old, born February 4, 2003. 4. The parties have shared legal custody/visitation of the parties' minor children, CYLE STARNER-MOORE and COLE STARNER-MOORE. 5. Since birth, the said minor children have lived at the following address with the following persons: 1 DATE ADDRESS CUSTODY Present 1550 Williams Grove Road, #144 Natural Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Mother and 602 Park Ridge Drive Natural Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Father 6. The Relationship of the Petitioner in the Custody action to subject minor children is that of Natural Father. 7. The relationship of the Respondent in the Custody action to subject minor children is that of Natural Mother. 8. The Order of Court, states, in part, that Natural Father is to have visitation of Cole Starner and Cyle Starner every Wednesday, including overnight, every other Thursday, including overnights, and every other Weekend, from Friday at 6pm until Sunday at 8pm. 9. Contrary to, and in violation of, the Order, when Petitioner notified Respondent that he was going to exercise his visitation pursuant to the terms of the Order (specifically at the specified times and currently on his own), Respondent did not allow the subject children to visit with him, their Natural Father. 10. In addition, contrary to, and in violation of, the subject Order of Court, the Respondent did not allow the children their visit with their Natural Father as follows: 2 a. June 16, 2009, I contacted Cyle via text message to see what he was up too. To my surprise he told me that he was with a friend in Phoenixville, Pa, for a week. According to the court order, each parent must give a thirty day advance notice for a week long vacation. I was never contacted by his mother to inform me that he was going away and that he would also be missing his weekly visitation with me. It also states that the other parent shall provide advance notice of the address and telephone number of where the child can be contacted. Cyle then informed me that he was uncomfortable where he was and wanted to come home, and had contacted his mother to pick him up. His mother said that she was unable to go and get him, because of car issues and again never contacted me. To me this is irresponsible, because my child was uncomfortable in the situation that he was in, for various reasons. I took it upon myself when he told me the situation, to pick up my child and bring him home. I asked him how uncomfortable he was, because it was 11:30 pm and it was a two hour drive one way. He was uncomfortable enough that he said he would wait up for me to get him; I arrived in Phoenixville at approximately 1:30 am. b. July 1, 2009, Cole and Cyle were with me for their visitation. Cyle informed me that he was going without his medication. My son has asthma and the medications he takes are health-sustaining drugs. I contacted his mother after my conversation with Cyle and she informed me, that yes he had not had his medicine that day and only had half a pill the day before. Cyle is to take one full pill daily. I contacted the pharmacy where his prescriptions are filled and noticed by the prescription fills that he has not been taken his medicine on a regular basis as prescribed. I'm not sure if he is missing full days or taking half a pill a day. I checked the price of the prescription and to my surprise it was $20 for a ten-day supply. What I am upset about is the fact that not only did Loretta receive $242 in child-support that week from me, but my child came to my house that day with a new video game, a new stuff animal, and having eaten breakfast that day at Bakers Restaurant. The breakfast alone would have paid for my son's medication. I took it upon my self to pay for the prescription and give it to my son. This shows irresponsibility and also concerns me that financially she cannot take care of my children for their everyday needs. We had discussed in the last conciliation, April 29,', 2009, that if one parent could not financially take care of the children, then the other parent would gain custody. It's my understanding that not only is Loretta is unemployed, but the children have no medical insurance. My concern is for the well-being of my children and I feel that with me they would be provided for in a better way. Understanding the unemployment because of the economy is acceptable, because I also was laid off and I am also collecting unemployment. The difference is that I am also a full time college student bettering my employment options and I also have additional resources to care for my children because my fiancee with whom I live has a full time job. 4 c. Friday, July P, 2009, I arrived at Rutter's on Route 15 in Dillsburg at 6pm to pick up my children for my weekend custody as per the court order. At approximately 20 after 6, I contacted my sons because they had not arrived yet. I was told that if I wanted them I had to go to the house to pick them up because their mother was having car issues again and would not be bringing them. I understand that everyone has car issues, but I was not notified of this in advance so other arrangements could be made. If she knew she was having issues, she should have made arrangements with a friend or neighbor to bring her to the location where we were to meet. She knows that not only not having them at Rutter's at 6pm is a violation of the court order, but having me pick them up at her residence is a violation of my PFA. d. July 5, 2009, Cole was told that he needed to take a bath before we could leave for our daily activity. He then threw a temper tantrum saying that he did not want to take a bath and that I was an abuser. In my opinion no six year old child would understand what the word abuse means. I then asked him how was I abusing him and he stated that it was because I don't buy him things all the time. In the court order under section 13 it states, "Neither party shall do or say anything which may estrange the children from the other parent, injure the opinion of the children as to the other parent, or hamper the free and natural development of the children's love and respect for the other parent." This is a repeated offense of the court orders. A contempt was filled on April 10 and June 8 h, 2009, for making 5 derogatory comments about me in front of my children and of course one of the remarks repeatedly said was that I am an abuser. Loretta was found guilty of disorderly conduct on June 2""', 2009, stemming from the incidents on April 1St, 2009, which led to the contempt filed on April 14th, 2009. *witness statements are available for every incident listed above upon request* 6 WHEREFORE, the Petitioner, CRAIG E. STARNER, respectfully requests that this Honorable Court grant the relief requested, and any other relief deemed appropriate, and enter an order holding the Respondent, LORETTA M. MOORE, in contempt of Court, and enter a final order, Ordering that the petitioner be granted full physical custody of both children. Respectfully Submitted, BV4 g Starner, Pro Se Dated: L71609 ?ci Petitioner 7 VERIFICATION I VERIFY THAT THE STATEMENTS MADE IN THIS PETITION FOR CONTEMPT FOR DISOBEDIENCE OF THE CUSTODY ORDER ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, BELIEF, AND INFORMATION. I UNDERSTAND THAT FALSE STATEMENTS HEREIN ARE MADE SUBJECT TO THE PENALTIES OF 18 PA.C.S § 4909 RELATING TO UNSWORN FALSIFICATION TO AUTHORITIES. CRAIG E. STARNER 8 FELCL'-?~ OF THLE 2019,a','- -7 F 12: UV r? . l?? CRAIG E. STARNER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. 2008-5973 CIVIL ACTION LAW LORETTA M. MOORE IN CUSTODY DEFENDANT ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, Thursday, July 09, 2009 , 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 Thursday, July 16, 2009 _ at 1:00 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/ Dawn S. Sunda Es q. 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 r`: ?, f? ???9 ,?7.??. ? ? ? ? ? ? ,?,? ,' ?'L':,{??_. ?.? ??- ,.,o.o? ? ?./D?O/? i p?? ?i ?j ??4 JUL 772009(„ CRAIG E. STARNER Plaintiff vs. LORETTA M. MOORE Defendant Prior Judge: J. Wesley Oler, Jr. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 2008-5973 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: follows: 1. The pertinent information concerning the Children who are the subjects of this litigation is as NAME DATE OF BIRTH CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF Cyle Starner-Moore November 3, 1994 Cole Starner-Moore Mother February 4, 2003 Mother 2. A custody conciliation conference was held on July 16, 2009, with the following individuals in attendance: the Father, Craig E. Starner, who is not represented by counsel in this matter, and the Mother, Loretta M. Moore, with her counsel, Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire. 3. The Father filed two (2) Petitions for Contempt, both of which were addressed at the conference. The parties have an extremely contentious parenting relationship and a Protection from Abuse Order is in effect limiting the Father's contact with the Mother. Each of the Father's claims in these Petitions was discussed and most of the allegations were denied by the Mother. It did appear that there had been a failure by the Mother to notify the Father of Cyle's Middle School graduation and of an instance in which one of the Children was absent from school for two consecutive days, both of which resulted in part due to the parties' inability to communicate on a meaningful level even on issues strictly related to the Children. It was strongly recommended that the parties make arrangements for the Children to participate in counseling to help them cope with the high level of conflict in the family. The parties were further advised to exchange all information by email communication to avoid confrontation, minimize misunderstandings and promote at least a minimal level of cooperation for the Children's benefit. 4. It should be noted that the Father provided notice of his intention to exercise his right to periods of vacation custody from July 17 through July 24 and from August 14 through August 21, 2009. The Father provided the address and telephone number where the Children can be contacted during the first period of vacation custody at the time of the conference. 5. The Father did not feel it was necessary to schedule a hearing in this matter. The Contem t Petitions are considered to have been resolved, and no further Order is necessary at this time. p C<? / Date Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire Custody Conciliator cc: lg E. Starner - Father Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire - Counsel for Mother CO t ES rnatb?CL 7/x.8lol `z/n 2009 !IT 23 Fhi : 01 COO \r n oJ? i p l eu u --- ?d add, f? ?d clyders Ofe- rex,"" peg Ay'f a•? resolved ct,/ e-d--'s CRAIG E. STARNER, Plaintiff V. LORETTA MOORE, Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO.: 2008-5973 : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : IN CUSTODY PETITION FOR CONTEMPT AND MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CUSTODY ORDER AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Craig E. Starner, by and through his attorney, Melanie L. Erb, Esquire and the Dethlefs-Pykosh Law Group, LLC, who files this Petition for Contempt and Modification of Existing Custody Order and avers as follows: 1. Petitioner is Craig E. Starner, an adult individual currently residing at 602 Park Ridge Drive, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, 17055. 2. Respondent is Loretta Moore, an adult individual currently residing at 1550 Williams Grove Road, #144, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, 17055. 3. Petitioners are the parents of two minor children, Cyle Starner-Moore, born November 3, 1994 and Cole Starner-Moore, born February 4, 2003. 4. A current custody Order was entered in this matter on May 12, 2009. 5. Pursuant to said Order, the parties share legal custody of the minor children, while Mother has primary physical custody and Father has periods of partial physical custody. 6. Since the entry of said Order, several incidents of contempt have occurred. 7. On numerous occasions Respondent has made derogatory comments about Petitioner to the minor children. 8. It is believed and therefore averred that Respondent is attempting to alienate the children from Petitioner by her repeated derogatory comments about him to the children. 9. On or about September 9, 2009, Petitioner became aware via e-mail that both minor children were being treated for asthma. When Petitioner requested information regarding this treatment he was denied said information by Respondent. 10. On or about September 11, 2009, Petitioner became aware that the children were placed in counseling sessions without his advice or consent. 11. After requesting to spend the night of September 16, 2009 with his Father, the minor child, Cole Starner-Moore on September 13, 2009, Petitioner sent an e-mail to Respondent regarding this request. 12. Petitioner received an e-mail response on September 16, 2009 to this request that the child did not want to stay over yet the minor child indicated that "mommy doesn't like it" when Petitioner asked the minor child why he had changed his mind. 13. On September 25, 2009, Petitioner attempted to pick up the minor child, Cole Starner- Moore to take him to a school event known as "doughnuts with dads." However, when he arrived he was told the child was not going. The minor child then advised Petitioner that Respondent would not allow him to do with Petitioner. 14. Further, on October 2, 2009, Respondent withdrew the minor child, Cyle Starner-Moore from school with the intention of enrolling him in a cyber school without Petitioner's consent. 15. The minor child, Cyle Starner-Moore had indicated to Petitioner that he wished to attend school in the school district where Petitioner resides. 16. It is believed and therefore averred that the minor child, Cyle Starner-Moore is minimally supervised by Respondent when in her care as he is frequently on the computer, using myspace, after midnight on a school night. 17. It would be in the children's best interest for Father to be awarded primary physical custody to Petitioner. WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Craig E. Starner, respectfully requests this Honorable Court schedule a conference/hearing in this matter. Respectfully Submitted, e , Esquire PA D. No. 84445 Dethlefs - Pykosh Law Group, LLC 2132 Market Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 975-9446 Attorney for Plaintiff VERIFICATION I, Craig Starner, hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Date: /© 0 f'iP -!?, , e?? oe-e. 4' CRAIG E. STARNER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. • 2008-5973 CIVIL ACTION LAW LORETTA MOORE IN CUSTODY DEFENDANT ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, Thursday, October 29, 2009 , 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, December 01, 2009 at 12:00 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/ Dawn S. Sunda Es q. 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 OF 7?rc PRCiY 2009OCT 29 P11 3: 28 ,w m Q12010 CRAIG E. STARNER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Vs. 2008-5973 CIVIL ACTION LAW LORETTA MOORE Defendant IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 3 r day of ?-y> c, , 2010, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows: Based upon the Father's failure to indicate whether or how he wishes to proceed as discussed at the custody conciliation conference on December 8, 2009, the Father's Petition for Contempt and Modification is dismissed without prejudice. cc BY THE COURT, v " lanie L. Erb, Esquire - Counsel for Father ?Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire - Counsel for Mother Oln 'ex enai6c-L io 3/!C? o c:. o ? M GYi !r W S; W t ?{ Q i !IL. CRAIG E. STARNER VS. LORETTA MOORE Plaintiff Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 2008-5973 CIVIL ACTION LAW IN CUSTODY Prior Judge: J. Wesley Oler, Jr. CUSTODY CONCILIATION SUMMARY REPORT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CUMBERLAND COUNTY RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1915.3-8, the undersigned Custody Conciliator submits the following report: The pertinent information concerning the Children who are the subjects of this litigation is as follows: NAME DATE OF BIRTH CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF Cyle Starner-Moore November 3, 1994 Mother Cole Starner-Moore February 4, 2003 Mother 2. A custody conciliation conference was held on December 8, 2009, with the following individuals in attendance: the Father, Craig E. Starner, with his counsel, Melanie L. Erb, Esquire, and the Mother, Loretta Moore, with her counsel, Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire. 3. This Court entered an Order in this matter on May 12, 2009 under which the Mother has primary physical custody and the Father has partial custody. The Father filed this Petition for Contempt and Modification. 4. At the time of the conciliation conference the parties were able to agree on various arrangements including the appointment of a Parent Coordinator as the primary agreement. It was agreed at the end of the conference that counsel would discuss selection of the professional who would serve as the Parent Coordinator and advise the conciliator accordingly. To follow up, counsel for the parties and the conciliator had a telephone conference on December 9, 2009 to finalize the arrangements. At that time, counsel advised that the Mother was not able to contribute to the costs of the Parent Coordinator and several options were identified including: (1) The Father would pay for the Parent Coordinator and the rest of the Order would be entered as the parties had agreed, (2) A hearing would be scheduled and the agreed upon aspects of the Order would be implemented on an interim basis pending the hearing, (3) There would be no Parent Coordinator appointed and only the other i agreements the parties had discussed would be entered as an Order and (4) The Parent Coordinator would be appointed for a shorter period of time for which the Father would pay the costs. The conciliator held the matter pending response by the Father's counsel as to which option had been selected. The conciliator contacted the Father's counsel by both email and telephone in February, April and May to discuss progress in determining the Father's intentions and finally indicated in the communication on May 11 that if the Father had not responded by May 24 as to whether he wished to proceed with this matter, jurisdiction would be relinquished and he could thereafter file a petition if he later decided to pursue the matter. As the Father has not responded either directly to the conciliator or through his counsel, despite his counsel's efforts in this matter, it appears that he does not intend to proceed with his Petition at this time and the conciliator recommends an Order in the form as attached dismissing the Petition without prejudice. a. 020/(7 Date Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire Custody Conciliator v CRAIG E. STARNER, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : N0.:2008-5973 ~ LORETTA MOORE, : CIVIL ACTION-LAW C'0 . Defendant : IN CUSTODY C) PETITION FOR CONTEMPT AND rt~ MODIFICATION OF EXISTING CUSTODY ORDER AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Craig E. Starner, Pro Se, who files this petition far Contempt and Modification of Existing Custody Order and avers as follow: 1. Petitioner is Craig E. Starner, an adult individual currently residing at 922 Allenview Drive, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, 17055. 2. Respondent is Loretta Moore, an adult individual currently residing at 1550 Williams Grove Road, #144, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, 17055. 3. Petitioners are the parents of two minor children, Cyle Starner-Moore, born November 3, 1994 and Cole Starner-Moore, born February 4, 2003. 4. A current Custody Order was entered in this matter on May 12, 2009. 5. Pursuant to said Order, the parties share legal custody of the minor children, while Mother has primary physical custody and Father has periods of partial physical custody. 6. Since the entry of said Order, several incidents of contempt have occurred. 7. On numerous occasions Loretta has made derogatory comments about Petitioner to the minor children. 8. It is believed and therefore averred that Loretta is attempting to alienate the children from Craig by her repeated derogatory comments about him to the children. g7 c~5k- ~ 9. On or about Friday, December 31, 2010 a scheduled day of custody exchange Loretta did not show up, Craig finally did get Cole Starner-Moore on Saturday, January 1, 2011 at or about 1 p.m. 10. On or about Wednesday, August 24, 2011, a scheduled day of custody exchange, agreement was made by phone to pick children up at Loretta residence. After getting there and having a conversation with Cyle, Loretta came out and demanded that I leave the property while using derogatory and profanity remaxks towards me and in front of the children; and was told I was not getting the children for my visit. 11. On or about Friday, September 9, 2011, a scheduled day of custody exchange Loretta notified Craig that Cole was not going to be coming for his visit on Friday due to being ill. I asked about Cole seeing a doctor and was told no that he did not need one. I told Loretta that I was more than able to take care of my son and that I would be at Rutters at 6pm that Qvening and was told " NO". Loretta never showed up at the scheduled time. Got notificatipn at or around 11 am on Saturday, September 10, 2011 that Loretta would be available around 1:30 pm for me to get Cole. I told Loretta that I had already had plans that were made a week prior and was not going to be in the area and that Cole was to be a part of these plans. I never got my weekend visitatian due to not being able to meet when it was eonvenient for Loretta. 12. On or about Saturday, April 16, 2011, Loretta and the children were forced from their home due to flooding conditions at Williams Grove Mobile Home Park. My wife Laurie Starner had to go and pick up Loretta and the two boys due to Loretta's car being flooded out. I left work to be home for my children and when they had arrived I said to Loretta, that Cyle, Cole and herself could stay at our home. Loretta refused to stay and refused to let the boys stay a1so, as a result they stayed in a Red Cross Shelter and missed at least one day of school. 13. On or about Thursday, October 27, 2011, around 6:30p.m. while on visit with Cole. Cole started to have a temper tantrum and did not get his way, he then called Loretta in which she took it upon herself to come to my house and cause a scene, making derogatory comments directly in front of both children and also in front of other children and their parents due to being trick or treat night in my neighborhood. Loretta then took Cole with . ~ her when I still had 2 hours left of my court ordered visitation. I stated that I still had two hours left of my visitation and Loretta took him anyway. I 14. Having no reasonable contact by phone to the children other than Loretta's Cell phone. 15. It would be in the children's best interest for Father to be awarded primary physical custody to Petitioner. WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Craig E. Starner, respectfully requests this Honorable Court schedule a conference/hearing in this matter. Respectfully Submitted, ~ Craig Starner, Pro Se Dated: OC~ 2~s F 2C, Petitioner f ; L VERIFICATION I VERIFY THAT THE STATEMENTS MADE IN THIS PETITION FOR CONTEMPT FOR DISOBEDIENCE OF CUSTODY ORDER ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, BELIEF, AND INFORMATION. I UNDERSTAND THAT FALSE STATEMENTS HEREIN ARE MADE SUBJECT TO THE PENALTIES OF 18 PA.C.S.§ 4909 RELATING TO UNSWORN FALSIFICATION TO AUTHORITIES. CRAIG STARNER CRAIG E. STARNER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF C PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVA *JIXi - xrn V q < Mi= - V Zi Cm . 2008-5973 CIVIL ACTION LAW cl :X C:)- s LORETTA M. MOORE = IN CUSTODY (-_ to p> DEFENDANT ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, Thursday, November 03, 2011 , 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, December 05, 2011 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 Custodv orders to the conciliator 48 hours prior to scheduled hearing. FOR THE COURT. By: /s/ Dawn S. Sunday, Esq. ?1j 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 cod 00'now ?C'op `„ ?rCPd ? v?? y a?iGP? TD .0 ? ,Ff rhe?,n???t 32 South Bedford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Telephone (717) 249-3166 elo/)Cfl"6 /- t/3/// A7C CRAIG E. STARNER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 2008-5973 CIVIL TERM LORETTA M. MOORE, CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendant IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 2nd day of February, 2012, by agreement of the parties, hearing in this matter is continued to Monday, March 26, 2012, at 9:15 a.m. By the Court, Edward E. Guido, J. Johanna H. Rehkamp, Esquire For the Plaintiff ? Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire For the Defendant srs ') , (I led Ma - c ?- ?? ,r r.. CRAIG E. STARNER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW 2008-5973 CIVIL TERM ?? LORETTA M. MOORE, ?- f Defendant IN CUSTODY PRAECIPE TO ENTER APPEARANCE r To the Prothonotary: Please enter my appearance on behalf of the defendant, LORETTA M. MOORE, in the above captioned case. Respectfully submitted, IRWIN & McKNIGHT, P.C. By: Douglas Miller, Esq. 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-2353 Supreme Court I.D. No. 83776 Date: March 26, 2012 Attorney for Defendant CRAIG E. STARNER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW 2008-5973 CIVIL TERM LORETTA M. MOORE, Defendant IN CUSTODY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Marcus A. McKnight, III, Esquire, hereby certify that a copy of attached document was served upon the following by depositing a true and correct copy of the same in the United States mail, First Class, postage prepaid in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, on the date referenced below and addressed as follows: Johanna H. Rehkamp, Esq. Turner and O'Connell 4701 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 IRWIN & McKNIGHT, P.C. r- Douglas . Miller, Esq. 60 West Pomfret Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 (717) 249-2353 Supreme Court I.D. No. 83776 Attorney for Defendant Date: March 26, 2012 2 CRAIG E. STARNER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. NO. 2008-5973 CIVIL TERM LORETTA M. MOORE, Defendant CIVIL LAW - CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 26th day of March, 2012, after hearing, Father's Petition to Modify the Custody Order is DISMISSED, and our Order of May 12, 2009, shall remain in full force and effect. By the Court, Edward E. Guido, J. -P. Johanna H. Rehkamp, Esquire. Attorney for Plaintiff Douglas G. Miller, Esquire Attorney for Defendant srs I , COF, 'S /Haled 31.) 71 .? Ate. CRAIG E. STARNER, Plaintiff V. LORETTA M. MOORE, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2008-5973 CIVIL TERM CIVIL LAW - CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 26th day of March, 2012, after hearing, Father's Petition for Contempt is DISMISSED. By the Court, Edward E. Guido, J. ? Johanna H. Rehkamp, Esquire Attorney for Plaintiff t/ Douglas G. Miller, Esquire Attorney for Defendant srs = Y f M _ -< __j 4 - c CD -r