HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-2385
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
COUNTY OF: CUMBERLAND
Mag. Dist. No.
09-1-01
OJ Name: Hon
CHARL,J;:S A. CLEMENT, JR.
Add"" 400 BRIDGE STREET
OLDE TOWNE COMMONS -SUITE 3
NEW CUMBERLAND, PA
T"'pho" (717) 774 - 5989 17070
BARBARA SOMPLE-SULLIVAN
ATTORNEY-AT-LAW
549 BRIDGE STREET
NEW CUMBERLAND, PA 17070
nlis IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT:
Judgment:
04 - ;t~~ Ciui.(. '[~
NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT
CIVIL CASE
PLAINTIFF: NAME and ADDRESS
'sUMPLE - SULLIVAN, BARBARA I
ATTORNEY-AT-LAW
549 BRIDGE STREET
~ CUMBERLAND, PA 17070 ...J
VS.
DEFENDANT:
'MATTOS, PAMELA S
4920 SHASTA WAY
MECHANICSBURG, PA
L
Docket No.: cv- 0000116 - 04
Date Filed: 3/11/04
NAME and ADDRESS
I
17050
...J
-
FOR PT,l\.TNTIFF
[iJ
[iJ
Judgment was entered for:
(Name)
!'lTlMPT.R - !'lTTT,T,TVl\.1IT; RlUHIl\.lll\.
Judgment was entered against: (Name)
in the amount of $
MATTUll, Pl\.MRT.l\. II
4/12/04
ANY PARTY HAS THE RIGHT TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 CAYS AFTER THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT BY FILING A NOTICE
OF APPEAL WITH THE PROTHONOTARY/CLERK OF THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CIVIL DIVISION. YOU
MUST INCLUDE A COpy OF THIS NOTICE OF JUDGMENTITRANSCRIPT FORM WITH YOUR NOTICE OF APPEAL
EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR DISTRICT JUSTICES, IF THE JUDGMENT HOLDER
ELECTS TO ENTER THE JUDGMENT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ALL FURTHER PROCESS MUST COME FROM THE COURT
OF COMMON PLEAS AND NO FURTHER PROCESS MAY BE ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT JUSTICE.
UNLESS THE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, ANYONE INTERESTEo IN,HB<lUDGMENT MAY FILE
A REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF SATISFACTION WITH THE DISTRICT JUSTICE IF THE JUDGMENT D6Itl'OR p,tYs':I+IFixl-, SETTLES,
..... . '- .. ~ " '"
OR OTHERWISE COMPLIES WITH THE JUDGMENT. ~. ~ ..' .
.::......, ."
~ ~.J~. ~ ~
/"\ /l ~ ~1f . ~ ~.. , 0> ,.
~ Q. ~~. t.::t(i.6Jt~;~tJUS~~
~ ,. .r.~_ i, .
edings conf~irkJi~ l~ejud{rr\'1erit.
"'; ........
~I ."' _'
11,,'1,' ,Distrilf).Justice
111.IlH\!'
1 ,210 _ 1 7 on:
o Defendants are jointly and severally liable.
o Damages will be assessed on:
o This case dismissed without prejudice,
O Amount of Judgment Subject to
Attachment/42 Pa.C.S. 9 8127 $
o Portion of Judgment for physical
damages arising out of residential
lease $
APR 1 2 2004 D
ate
I certify that this is a true a~otect cR~ of the "'~.I of th
5/13/2004 Date ~O,\U)
My commission expires first Monday of January, 2008
Aope 315-03
DATE PRINTED:
4/12/04
(Date of Judgment)
(Date & Time)
Amount of Judgment
Judgment Costs
Interest on Judgment
Attorney Fees
Total
$ 1,139.17
$ 71.00
$ .00
$ .00
$ 1,210.17
Post Judgment Credits $
Post Judgment Costs $
------------
------------
Certified Judgment Total $
SEAL
4:32:28 PM
~ i\J (:)
[ill(
~ ~ ~
j C') ~
p.I ~ D
,....
f:
~
:<>
~
V)
~
~
---:t:-
r
Ci
r---
(tl
I
t:
r-.....
-
c'
r
~ 0
=:> "
....
:!: :=2 -r.
> rnj=
-0;; -om
~ 3l
-j'TI
I-n
,J '2c=s
~..~ () nl
rv ..,-;
a ~
0;)
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL DIVISION
PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF EXECUTION
vs.
Confessed Judgment
Other
File No. I~I 8660116-54 2004 -Ol.~ ~5
Amount Due $1 ,210.17
Interest
Atty's ~IOO[ Fees and Costs
Costs
Caption:
Barbara Sump1e-Sullivan
Pamela S. Mattus
TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF THE SAID COURT:
The undersigned hereby certifies that the below does not arise out of a retail installment sale, contract, or
account based on a confession of judgment, but if it does, it is based on the appropriate original proceeding filed
pursuant to Act 7 of 1966 as amended; and for real property pursuant to Act 6 of 1974 as amended.
Issue writ of execution in the above matter to the Sheriff of CUmberland
for debt, interest and costs, upon the following described property of the defendant(s)
County,
Any and all property locted at 514 partridqe Court. ~lechanicsburq. PA 17055.
PRAECIPE FOR ATTACHMENT EXECUTION
Issue writ of attachment to the Sheriff of r.llmhPrl"nn County, for debt, interest and
costs, as above, directing attachment against the above-named garnishee(s) for the following property (if real
estate, supply six copies of the description; supply four copies of len'~thy personalty list)
and all other property of the defendant(s) in the possession, custody or control of the said garnishee(s).
o (Indicate) Index this writ against the garnishee(s) as a lis penden~6~ estate of the
defendant(s) described in the attached exhibit. / ~~
Date .~ ft 7 ' 2004 Signature: I _
/ Print Name: /. Barbara Sumple-Sullivan.
Esauire
Address:
549 Bridge street
New Cumberland, PA 17070
Attorney for: Pl "i nti ff
Telephone: (717)774-1445
Supreme Court ID INo.:32317
(over)
Notes: If real property, supply six copies of description including improvements and an original and copy of
affidavit of ownership (PaR.C.P. No. 3129).
If lengthy personalty list, supply four copies of list.
To index writ, file separate praecipe with writ.
(') ....,
:69- ,~ ~\~ "t c: 2: ~
... ...,..
-:-- - ....... ar~
~ ~ () .,p[i <;.. ~~
-.0 VI c::
0 .,.; ~ r-
~ ~ '" ,:> z~
V\ <J\ " ~., N ~~
., "..,~ (Xl
f r 'f:"i
'- r -.;, ;<--
......... ,.J ~ ~8 :l:>o 9-~
~ 1 ::J:
- >~
- ~ ~ - ~
~ -
" ~ ?i5
-..1 l' -.l -<
~ y ",
-
to>
,
~
-
::-
~
~,
\, "
WRIT OF EXECUTION andlor ATTACHMENT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA)
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND)
N004-2385 Civil
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
TO THE SHERIFF OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY:
To satisfy the debt, interest and costs due Barbara Sumple-Snllivlln Plllintiff (s)
From Pamela S. Mattus
(l) You are directed to levy upon the property of the defendllnt (s)and to sell Any and All Property
located at 514 Partridge Court, Mecbanicsbnrg, PA 17055
(2) You are also directed to attach the property of the defendant(s) not levied upon in the possession
of
GARNISHEE(S) as follows:
and to notify the gamishee(s) that: (a) an attachment has been issued; (b) the gamishee(s) is enjoined from
paying any debt to or for the account of the defendant (s) and from delivering any property of the defendant
(s) or otherwise disposing thereof;
(3) If property of the defendant(s) not levied upon an subject to attachment is found in the possession
of anyone other than a named garnishee, you are directed to notify him/her that helshe has been added as a
garnishee and is enjoined as above stated.
Amount Due$1,210.17
Interest
Atty's Comm %
Atty Paid $36.75
Plaintiff Paid
Date: Jnly 28, 2004
L.L.$0.50
Due Prothy $1.011
Other Costs
(Seal)
CURTIS R. LONG
:;~~Ilf9J~
Deputy
REQUESTING PARTY:
Name Barbara Sumple-Sullivan, Esq.
Address: 549 Bridge Street
New Cumberland, P A 17070
Attorney for: Plaintiff
Telephone: 717-774-1445
Supreme Court ID No. 32317
ROSALIE E. W ALTERS,
Plaintiff
v.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, COMMONWEALTH
OF PENNSYL VANIA
STEVEN A. SMITH AND
MELISSA A. SMITH,
Defendants
03-2385 CIVIL TERM
CUSTODY
DEFENDANT STEVEN A. SMITH'S MOTION PURSUANT TO 23 P A.C.S. 65308
and PETITION FOR MODIFICATION OF TillS COURT'S NOVEMBER 21.
2003 VISITATION ORDE]!
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
I. The child who is the subject of this custody action is Alisha Destiny Smith, D.G.B.
November 25, 2001, a two (2) year-old child, almost three (3) year-old child (Child).
2. Steven A. Smith (Defendant Father) is the Father of the Child.
3. Defendant Father resides at 41 Smith Road, Gardeners, Pennsylvania, 17324.
4. Melissa A. Smith (Defendant Mother) is the Mother of the Child.
5. Defendant Mother and Child are living at 8315 Parkview Avenue, Munster, Indiana,
46321, County of Lake, Indiana.
6. Plaintiff is Rosalie E. Walters (plaintiff), who resides at 41 Smith Road, Gardeners,
Pennsylvania, 17324.
7. Plaintiff is the Paternal grandmother of the child who is tile subject of this custody
action.
8. For the purposes of this Motion and Petition and further proceedings in this custody
matter, Plaintiff sides with Defendant Father's cause.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
9. Paragraphs 1 through 8 are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth at
length.
10. On or about May 18,2003, this custody action was initiated in Cumberland County,
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, with Plaintiffs Custody Complaint.
11. On August 15, 2003, Plaintiff and Defendant Mother entered into a Custody
Agreement. (Exhibit A at Agreement.)
12. Defendant Father was not an active party to that agreement because he was
incarcerated at the time. I
13. On November 21, 2003, the Custody Agreement was made a Custody Order
(Pennsylvania Order) by this Court. (Exhibit A at Order.)
14. Defendant Father has recently learned that Defendant Mother has left the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with the Child.
15. It is known that Defendant Mother and Child now are present in the State ofIndiana,
at 8315 Parkview Avenue, Munster, Indiana, 46321.
16. On or about, September I, 2004, Defendant Mother filed a Verified Petition To
Domesticate Foreign Judgment And Transfer Jurisdiction And Petition For Custody
Order in the Lake Superior Court Sitting at Gary Indiana. (Attached as Exhibit B.)
17. On or about, September 27,2004, Plaintiff filed Petitions with this Court, which
Petitions requested this Court to retain jurisdiction over this custody matter and to
modifY the current Pennsylvania Order.
2
18. Plaintiff has successfully served these Petitions upon Defendant Mother at her
previously stated address. (Exhibit C.)
19. This Court has since acted on Plaintiff's Petitions and has set a Conciliation date for
Thursday, November 11,2004, at 8:30 a.m. (Exhibit D.)
FACTS
20. Paragraphs I though 19 are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth at
length.
21. The Child was born on November 25,2001, in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
22. At that time, Defendant Mother was a resident of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
23. At the time of Child's birth, Defendant Father was incarcerated at the Adult Detention
Center in Frederick County, Maryland.
24. Throughout the period from Child's birth to May 2003, Defendant Mother regularly
took Child to visit Defendant Father at Defendant Father's place of incarceration.
25. Throughout the period from Child's birth to May 2003, Defendant Father desired to
visit with his child as often as his Penal Institutions' rules allowed.
26. Specifically:
a) From November 25,2001, through June 6, 2002, Defendant Father and Child
had visits twice a week at the Adult Detention Center in Frederick County,
Maryland;
I Defendant Father was incarcerated from October 25, 2001 through August 29,2004. Defendant Father is
now not incarcerated and in addition to Plaintiff, seeks to be involved in Child's life vis-a-vis periods of
partial custody.
3
b) From June 6, 2002, through January 31, 2003, Defendant Father and Child
had visits four times a week at the Adams County, Pennsylvania, Prison;
c) From January 31, 2003, until May 2003, Defendant Father and Child had
visits five times a month at the Pennsylvania State Correctional Institution at
Camp Hill.
27. In May, 2003, Defendant Mother cut-off all communications with Defendant Father
and Plaintiff.
28. It was at this time that Plaintiff' initiated a Custody Action in this Court.
29. As a result of Plaintiffs Complaint for Custody, this Court entered the Pennsylvania
Order on November 21, 2003, which Order granted Plaintiff every-ather-Saturday
periods of visitation. (Exhibit A at Order.)
30. That Order has never been modified, and therefore is tht~ current Order in force in this
custody matter.
31. Defendant Father was not an active party to the agreement underlying the Court's
Order because he was incarcerated at the time.3
32. Defendant Father has been released from prison and has been placed on probation and
house arrest.
33. Defendant Father's travel is restricted to his home and his work.
34. On April 2, 2004, this Court entered a Decree in Divorce between Defendant Mother
and Defendant Father.
'From the Child's birth until May 2003, Plaintiff has provided personal care and fmancial support for the
Child. Plaintiff has been very involved with Child's life.
J Defendant Father was incarcerated from October 25, 2001 through August 29,2004. Defendant Father is
now not incarcerated and in addition to Plaintiff, seeks to be involved in Child's life vis-a-vis periods of
partial custody.
4
35. Since the entry of the Pennsylvania Order, Defendant Mother, with Child, has left the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
36. Defendant Mother and Child can now be found in Munster, Indiana, where they stay
at Child's Maternal Grandmother's home.
37. Prior to Defendant Mother relocating herself and Child to Indiana, Child's Maternal
Grandmother did not participate in the Child's daily care.
38. It is not known whether or not she does so now.
39. It is believed, and therefore averred, that Defendant Mother and Child have resided in
Indiana for less than six months.
40. Defendant Mother did not seek modification of this Court's November 21,2003,
Order prior to leaving Pennsylvania.
41. However, on, or about, September, 2004, Defendant Mother filed a Verified Petition
To Domesticate Foreign Judgment And Transfer Jurisdiction And Petition For
Custody Order in the Lake Superior Court Sitting at Gary Indiana (Indiana Petition).
42. In that Indiana Petition Defendant Mother did not infornl the Lake Superior Court
Sitting at Gary Indiana that this Court had previously entered a Visitation Order.
(Indiana Petition at P 4.)
43. Instead, Defendant Mother informed the Lake Superior Court Sitting at Gary Indiana
that only a Custody Agreement had been entered into by Defendant Mother and
Plaintiff. (Indiana Petition at P 4.)
44. Defendant Mother, in her prayer for relief in the Indiana Petition, requested the Lake
Superior Court Sitting at Gary Indiana to domesticate and adopt this Court's April 2,
5
2004, Divorce Decree and to domesticate and adopt the Custody Agreement. (Indiana
Petition at P 12(A).)
45. Defendant Mother then requesed that the Lake Superior Court Sitting at Gary Indiana
grant her sole legal custody and primary physical custody of the Child and at the same
time requesed that the Lake Superior Court prevent Defendant Father and Plaintiff
from seeing the Child until a further order of the Lake Superior Court. (Indiana
Petition at P 12(C-D).)
46. Defendant Father avers that the best interests of Child will be served by this Court
maintaining jurisdiction over this Custody Matter.
47. This is true because Defendant Father, the Child, and Plaintiff have significant
connections with this Commonwealth and there is available in this Commonwealth
substantial evidence concerning the Child's present and future care, protection,
training, and personal relationships.
48. Child can be reared in this Commonwealth in a household that includes the presence
of a loving Father, paternal-Grandmother, and paternal-step-Grandfather, as well as
frequent visits from the paternal Great-grandmother.
49. If this Court does not set a hearing date for this motion, then Defendant Father and
Plaintiff would be agreeable to a joint-conciliation date, the date already set by this
Court pursuant to Plaintiff's Petitions and this Court's Order. (Exhibit D.)
ARGUMENT
50. Paragraphs I through 49 are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth at
length.
6
I. Motion Pursuant to 23 Pa. C.S. ~5308
51. If a party to a Custody Action removes herself or the (:hild from this Commonwealth
after a custody order has been made, the court, upon motion of either party, may
review the existing custody order. 23 Pa. C.S. ~5308.
52. Defendant Mother has removed herself and the Child from this Commonwealth.
53. This removal to Indiana occurred after this Court entered its November 21, 2004,
Order in this custody matter.
WHEREFORE Defendant Father respectfully requests this Court to review the
existing custody order and to set a date for a hearing so that a new Order can be entered
according to the best interest of the Child, or in the alternative, to schedule this matter for
the same date and time scheduled for the disposition of Plaintiff s Petitions, and to the
same conciliator who will handle the issues raised in those Petitions, so that all matters
raised regarding Child's best interest may be addressed in the same forum at the same
time.
II. Petition for Modification ofthis Court's November 21, 2003 Visitation
Order
54. Paragraphs 1 through 53 are incorporated herein by refe:rence as though set forth at
length.
A) Jurisdiction Over this Matter should Remain in this Court in the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
55. Under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, whieh both Pennsylvania and
Indiana have adopted in substantially the same language, a court which is competent
to decide child custody matters has jurisdiction to make ,child custody order
7
modifications ifit is the home state of the Child. 23 Pa. C.S. ~5344(a)(1)(i), ALC.
31-17-3-3. (ExhibitE, Exhibit F.)
56. Home state is defined as
[t]he state in which the child immediately preceding the
time involved lived with his parents, a parent or a person
acting as parent, or in an institution, for at least [six]
consecutive months, and, in the case of a child less than
[six] months old, the state in which the child lived from
birth with any of the persons mentioned. Periods of
temporary absence of any of the named persons are
counted as part of the [six-month] or other period.
23 Pa. C.S. ~5343, ALC. 31-17-3-2(5).
57. Another alternative to such a court's exercise of jurisdiction to modifY a
custody order is if
it is in the best interest of the child that a court of this
Commonwealth assume jurisdiction because:
(i) the child. . . and at least one contestant, have a
significant connection with this Commonwealth; and
(ii) there is available in this Commonwealth substantial
evidence concerning the present or future care, protection,
training and personal relationships of the child. . . .
23 Pa. C.S. ~5344(a)(2)(i) -(ii). ALC. 31-17-3-3(2)(providing the same language
except for using State where Pennsylvania's law uses Commonwealth, and with
different sub- section references, and punctuation).
58. And yet another alternative to such a court's exercise of jurisdiction to modifY a
custody order is if
(i) it appears that no other state would have jurisdiction
under prerequisites substantially in accordance with
paragraph (1), (2) or (3), or another state has
declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that this
8
Commonwealth is the more appropriate forum to determine
custody ofthe child; and
(ii) it is in the best interest of the child that thl: court assume
jurisdiction. . . .
23 Pa. C.S. ~5344(a)(4)(i)-(ii). A.LC. 31-17-3-3(4)(providing the same language
except for using State where Pennsylvania's law uses Commonwealth, and with
different sub-section references, and punctuation).
59. Indiana is not the Home State of the Child because Mother and Child had not resided
in Indiana for six consecutive months prior to Defendant Mother's initiating a custody
action in the Lake Superior Court Sitting at Gary Indiana.
60. Indiana is not the Home State of the Child because Mother and Child had not resided
in Indiana for six consecutive months prior to Plaintiff Petitioning this Court for a
modification of its November 21, 2003, Order.
61. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at the Court of Common Pleas, Cumberland
County, has jurisdiction to modify its November 21,2004, Order because Defendant
Father, the Child, and Plaintiff have significant connections with this Commonwealth
and there is available in this Commonwealth substantial evidence concerning the
Child's present and future care, protection, training, and personal relationships.
62. Child can be reared in this Commonwealth in a household that includes the presence
of a loving Father, paternal-Grandmother, and paternal-step-Grandfather, as well as
frequent visits from the paternal Great-grandmother.
63. Child has a support network in this Commonwealth that is generations strong.
64. Moreover, it appears as though Indiana does not have jurisdiction under prerequisites
substantially in accordance with the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act.
9
65. Child has never lived in Indiana prior to this most recent instance where Defendant
Mother relocated herself and Child to Indiana.
66. While Child has a maternal grandmother in Munster, Indiana, it was not this
grandmother who provided personal care to the Child during Child's first years of
life.
67. Paternal Grandmother was personally involved with Child's care during Child's first
years of life and desires to so continue.
68. There is available in this Commonwealth substantial evidence, and stronger evidence
than exists in Indiana, concerning the Child's present and future care, protection,
training, and personal relationships.
WHEREFORE this Court should maintain jurisdiction over this Child Custody Matter.
B) Any proceeding in this Matter conducted in Indi:ana would be an
Inconvenient Forum
69. Paragraphs I though 68 are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth at
length.
70. "Before determining whether to decline or retain jurisdiction, the Court may
communicate with a Court of another state and exchange information pertinent to
the assumption of jurisdiction by either Court with a vi,:w to assuring that
jurisdiction will be exercised by the more appropriate Court and that forum will be
available to the parties". 23 Pa. C.S. 95348(d)
71. This Court should communicate with The Lake Superior Court, Room Number
Three, Sitting At Gary Indiana ((219)-755-3681, or (219)-755-3456).
10
72. Because Defendant Father is unable to travel to Indiana4 to attend a Jurisdictional or
other hearing, any proceeding in Indiana would be In(;onvenient.
WHEREFORE, Defendant Father requests this Court to maintain Jurisdiction over this
Custody Matter.
C) The Best Interest of the Child Will Best Be Served Through a Modification of
the Current Order
73. Paragraphs I through 72 are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth at
length.
74. This Order should be modified because:
· Defendant Father's rights as to Child were not addressed in this Court's
November 21, 2003, Order;
· Child's rights as to Defendant Father were not addressed in this Court's
November 21, 2003, Order;
· Defendant Father hereby seeks out those rights on Child's behalf and Father's
behalf;
· Defendant Father is ready, willing, and able to expand his involvement in
Child's life;
· Child will benefit from Defendant Father's care, love, and attention;
· Child will benefit from the strong family support available in this
Commonwealth; and
4 Plaintiff Father has been placed on house arrest as part of his probation restrictions.
II
. The best interest of the Child will be served by granting Defendant Mother
and Defendant Father shared legal custody of Child and by substantially
altering the physical custody arrangements.
WHEREFORE Defendant Father requests this Court to modifY this Court's current
Order and grant Defendant Mother and Defendant Father shared legal custody of Child
and substantially alter the physical custody arrangements iin accordance with the best
interest of the child, or in the alternative, to schedule this matter for the same date and
time scheduled for the disposition of Plaintiff's Petitions, and to the same conciliator who
will handle the issues raised in those Petitions, so that all matters raised regarding Child's
best interest may be addressed in the same forum at the same time.
~o "'" "'0"\
Date
j)~
sel for the Plaintiff
J C. Porter, Esq.
Pol. Sup. Ct. II) #90152
Stephanie E. Chertok, R.N., Esq.
Pol Sup. Ct. ID# 52651
6 I West Louther Street
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
12
EXHIBIT Pl
BLAKE 6- GROSS, LL C
ATTORNEYS AND
COUNSELLORS AT LAw
?9 EAST PHILADELPHiA STREET
YORK, PA 17401
7]7848.3078
FAx 717.848.2777
WWIf<BUlKEGRQSSlAIV.COM
II
II
I
I'
Ii
ji
II
Ii
II
I'
,I
II
Ii
Ii
[I
II
II
II
Ii
II
II attached Custody Agreement that has been signed and acknowledged by the respective
I
II
Ii
II
I
I
I
I
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYL VANIA
ROSALIE E. W ALTERS
Plaintiff
No. 03-2385
vs.
CML ACTION - LAW
STEVEN A. SMITH and
MELISSA A. SMITH
Defendants
IN CUSTODY
ORDER
AND NOW, this -2.->\ day of
~"
.-. :d
~A
\,
\
. 2003, upon consideration of the
parties, it is HEREBY ORDERED that the terms a:rrd conditions contained in the attached
Custody Agreement in the above captioned matter is entered as an Order of Court.
I
I
r
,[
Ii
,I
II
II
II
II
II S? ~
II .~
!I~~t?
II' \,,6)
\,,0-
, \
BY THE COURT:
/)
<'&{
/
f { ...," /
7A'
/../ f
J.
\
~''-~
/
ROSALIEE. WALTERS,
Plaintiff
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUl\.1BERLAND COUNTY,
: PENNSYLVANIA
v.
: CIVIL ACTION -LAW
: CUSTODY
STEVEN A SMITH and
MELISSA A SMITH
Defendants
: NO. 03- 2385 CIVIL TERM
CUSTODY AGREEMEl'iT
TillS AGREEMENT, made this \5~ay of A-<j "..t, 2003, between Rosalie E. Walters,
hereinafter "Grandmother" and Melissa A Smith, hereinafter, "Mother", concerns the custody of
Alisha Destiny Smith, hereinafter, "the child", born November 25,2001. Melissa A Smith and
Steven A Smith, hereinafter, "Father", are the natural parents of the child.
Mother and Grandmother desire to enter into an agreement as to the custody of the child
as follows:
I. Mother shall have sole legal custody of the child and primary physical custody of
the child.
2. Grandmother shall have periods of visitation with the child which may occur at
Grandmother's home or other place of mutual convenience, every other Saturday
from 9:00 a..tn. to 6:00 p.m. The day and times of the visitation may be modified
by mutual consent of Mother and Grandmother.
3. Mother shall provide all transportation for Grandmother's visitation by delivering
the minor child to Grandmother's home or other mutually agreed location.
4. If Mother decides to change her and the child's residence from Cumberland
County, Pennsylvania, she shall give Grandmother as much advance notice as
possible.
5. Neither Mother nor Grandmother shall speak ill, or allow others to speak ill, of
each other in the child's presence.
6. Father is not a party to this agreement, and this agreement does not purport to set
forth any rights or responsibilities of Father vis-a-vis the child.
7. Mother and Grandmother acknowledge that they have read and understand the
provisions of this Custody Agreement.
8. Mother and Grandmother desire that this Custody Agreement be entered as an
Order of the Court ofCo=on Pleas of Cumberland County.
f\^ .f' 0 D G t
~ 1\k!' i~J~_w \. '0' V\\JX '\
MelIssa A Smith
~
~ .. ~
( -p( &" C 7'
,-/ \ ..[1-.6..12_ '--
Rosalie E. Walters
" (lD..-..
W,,~..
{~, F, ~
,>-' 'r{'t)e' ~" ~-
, "j" /i \ :-""
C/L/~''',v I "/[ l,J? L...-,
Erin L. Benson
Certified Legal Intern
~--
Ron . Gross
Bl & Gross, LLC
29 East Philadelphia St.
York, PA 17401
(717)848-3078
Counsel tilr Rosalie E. Walters
~-,) , - /-:;
/" ,~,/ A! r/-C'.'. /</,
^ _ ()/ ~>tt"l c::", 1!/llJ{4.
ROBERT E. RAINS
THOMAS M. PLACE
Supervising Attorneys
LUCY JOHNSTON-WALSH
Staff Attorney
FAMILY LAW CLINIC
45 North Pitt Street
Carlisle, PA 17012
(717) 243-2968
Counsel for Melissa A Smith
EXHIBIT E~
STATE OF INDIANA
) IN THE LAKE SUPERIOR COURT
)SS: ROOM NUMBER THREE
) SITTING AT GARY, INDIANA
COUNTY OF LAKE
IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF: )
MELISSA SMITH, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
And ) CAUSE NO:
)
STEVEN A. SMITH, )
)
Respondent. )
VERIFIED PETITION TO DOMESTICATE
FOREIGN JUDGMENT AND TRANSFER JURISDICTION
AND PETITION FOR CUSTODY ORDER
The Petitioner, Melissa A. Smith ("Melissa"), upon her oath, under penalties for
perjury, states as follows:
1. Melissa now resides in Munster, Lake County, Indiana, with Alisha Destiny
Smith, het minor child.
2. Melissa the Mother of Alisha Destiny Smith, born November 25, 2001, age
two (2) years, and said child has continuously resided with the Petitioner in Munster,
Lake County, Indiana for more than eight (8) months.
3. Melissa was granted a Decree in Divorce in the Court of Common Pleas of
Cumberland County, State of Pennsylvania, on April 2, 2004. A certified copy of said
Decree in Divorce is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and is incorporated by reference
herein.
4. Pursuant to a Custody Agreement entered into on August 15, 2003
entitled "Rosalie E. Walters, Plaintiff v. Steven A. Smith and Melissa A. Smith,
Defendants", Melissa was granted sole legal custody and primary physical custody of
her daughter, Alisha Destiny Smith. A copy of said Custody Agreement is attached
hereto as Exhibit "8" and is incorporated by reference herein.
5. The Father of said minor child is Steven A. Smith who is currently
incarcerated in a State prison located in Pennsylvania, and is serving time for the
offenses of domestic assault, reckless endangerment, resisting arrest, deviate sexual
assault, making terrorist threats, and escape.
6. The Father has applied for parole and hEl has been granted parole and
early release from prison within the next two months.
7. Indiana is the home state of Melissa and the parties' minor child at the
time of commencement of this proceeding. Melissa and said minor child have a
significant connection with the State of Indiana by virtUle of their residency and intent to
remain in Lake County, Indiana. There is available in Indiana substantial evidence
concerning the minor child's present and future care, protection, training, and personal
relationships. It is in the best interests of the minor ch'ild that a court of Indiana assume
jurisdiction over said minor child, Alisha Destiny Smith.
8. This Court should assume jurisdiction over the divorce and custody
proceedings previously litigated and determined in Pennsylvania pursuant to Indiana
Code Section 31-17-3-3(a)(1)(A) and 31-17-3-3(a)(2)(A) and (B).
9. Melissa requests that this Court assume jurisdiction of her dissolution
proceedings and confirm that she has sole legal custody and primary physical custody
of the parties' minor child.
2
10. The Petitioner further requests that the Court restrict and prevent any
visitation or parenting time by the Respondent/Father or by the patemal grandmother
due to previous threats, upon the Petitioner and Alisha. Destiny Smith as unbom minor
child, violence, and fear that the Respondent/Father and/or the patemal grandmother
will take the child out of the jurisdiction of Lake County, Indiana with the intent to retum
the child to the State of Pennsylvania or elsewhere.
11. There is no Child Support Order currently in effect for said minor child and
the Petitioner is not requesting a Child Support Order upon the Father at this time.
12. The Petitioner is financially able to support said minor child.
WHEREFORE, the Petitioner prays for the following relief:
A. This Court domesticate and adopt the Delcree in Divorce and
Custody Agreement from the Court of Common Pleas of
Cumberland County, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
B. This Court transfer jurisdiction of the Dissolution of Marriage and Custody
proceedings to Indiana.
C. This Court enter an immediate temporary order granting Petitioner sole
legal custody and primary physical custody of the parties' child, Alisha
Destiny Smith, pending further proceedings.
D. This Court enter an Order providing that Ithe Respondent/Father and the
paternal grandmother be restricted and preventing from exercising any
visitation or parenting time with the minor child of the parties until further
Order of Court.
3
E. And for all other just and proper relief in the premises.
~~-h.~
MELISSA A. SMITH, Petitioner
EU EM. EI OLD (#6801-45)
s~!L~Sf5045)
Law Offices of Eugene M. Feingold
625 Ridge Road, Suite A
Munster, IN 46321
(219) 836-8800
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on the ..J.Q day of 9, ~ . 2~, service of a true and complete copy of
the above and foregoing pleading or paper was made upon ea,ch party or attorney of record herein by
depostting the same in the Untted States Mail in envelopes prop'~rly addressed to each of them and with
sufficient first-class postage affixed.
lAW flF 'UGEN' M. FEINGOlD
By: k f-~
4
Of. i+'+ ;Ii'I':+i + + :+ i+';Ii;f.
+:+ . + :++++++ :+ +++++i+'++ +++i+'+i+'+++~
.
.
.
.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
+
+
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY
.
.
STATE OF
.
.
PENNA.
.
.
.
MELISSA A SMITH
PLAINTIFF
No. 03-2389 CIVIL TERM
.
.
.
VERSUS
STEVEN A SMITH
.
DEFENDANT
DECREE IN
DIVORCE
.
.
03:55 PM
.
.
.
AND NOW APRIL 2
,
2004
, IT IS ORDERED AND
.
.
DECREED THAT MELISSA A SMITH
, PLAINTIFF,
+
AND
STEVEN A SMITH
+
, DEFENDANT,
+
ARE DIVORCED FROM THE BONDS OF MATRIMONY.
+
THE COURT RETAINS JURISDICTION OF THE FOLLOWING CLAIMS WHICH HAVE
BEEN RAISED OF RECORD IN THIS ACTION FOR WHICH A FINAL ORDER HAS NOT
YET BEEN ENTERED;
+
ALL RELATED CLAIMS WERE WITHDRAWN
.
+
+
+
+
+
+
.
.
.
PJJ. +
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
.
+
+ I
+1' + +
A
BY THE COURT:
George E. Hoffer
Long
+ ;Ii +'1''+'++'+'+'+'+++
+
+ i+' '+'++++ ++++++++~
+
+ + +
++ +
ROSALIEE. WALTERS,
Plaintiff
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
: PENNSYL VANIA
v.
STEVEN A SMITH and
MELISSA A SMITII
Defendants
: CIVIL ACTION - LAW
: CUSTODY
: NO. 03- 238:5 CIVIL TERM
CUSTODY AGREEME:NT
THIS:AGREEMENT;.ma;dlnhi:st~ay 6T.Av;.~I-;'2M3,oetween RosiilieE. wiu.iers, .
hereinafter "Grandmother" and Melissa A Smith, hereinafter, "Mother", concerns the custody of
Alisha Destiny Smith, hereinafter, "the child", born Novemb'er 25, 2001. Melissa A. Smith and
Steven A. Smith, hereinafter, "Father", are the natural parents of the child.
Mother and Grandmother desire. to enter into an agreement as to the custody of the child
as follows:
1.
\
Mother shall have sole legal custody of the child and primary physical custody of
the child.
2. Grandmother shall have periods of visitation with the child which may occur at
Graridmother's home or other place of mutual' convenience, every other Saturday
from 9:00 a..m. to 6:00 p.m. The day and times of the visitation may be modified
by mutual consent of Mother and Grandmother.
3. Mother shall provide all transportation for Grandmother's visitation by delivering
the minor child to Grandmother's home or other mutually agreed location.
,4. If Mother decides to change her and the child's residence from Cumberland
County, Pennsylvania, she shall give Grandmother as much advance notice as
EXHIBIT
I
B
possible.
5. Neither Mother nor Grandmother shall speak ill, or allow others to speak iII, of
each other in the child's presence.
6. Father is not a party to this agreement, and this agreement does not purport to set
forth any rights or responsibilities of Father vis-a-vis the child.
7. Mother and Grandmother acknowledge that they have read and understand the
provisions of this Custody Agreement.
--------8:------Motherand-cJriiiiatilbllfeideSiretliiii this CUstodyXgreement be entered as an
Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County.
M;~Q1l/a ,Av."ctl
Melissa A. Smith
cx~ L O~_._-
Rosalie E. Walters
Cwkcl ~~
Erin L. Benson
Certified Legal Intern
~r~ss
~~; Gross, LLC
29 East Philadelphia S1.
York, PA 17401
(717)848-3078
Counsel for Rosalie E. Walters
L~e~
OBERT E. RAINS
mOMAS M. PLACE
Supervising Attorneys
LUCY JOHNSTON-WALSH
Staff Attorney
FAMILY LAW CLINIC
45 North Pitt Street
Carlisle, PA 17012
(717) 243-2968
Counsel for Melissa A. Smith
EXHIBIT C~
ROSALIE E. WALTERS,
Plaintiff
v.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERI,AND COUNTY, COMMONWEALTH
OF PENNSYL VANIA
STEVEN A. SMITH AND
MELISSA A. SMITH,
Defendants
03-2385 CIVIL TERM
CUSTODY
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, John C. Porter, counsel for Rosalie E. Walters, hereby certify that a true and
correct copy of PETITION FOR EMERGENCY RELIEF PURSUANT TO Pa.
R.C.P. 1915.4(e) and PETITION FOR CUSTODY MODIFICATION UNDER 23
PaeS. &5313(a) PURSUANT TO ORDER OF TIDS COURT DATED
DECEMBER 30. 2003 and PETITION FOR CONTEMPT, was served on the 28th
day of September, 2004, by Certified Mail, Return Re(:eipt Requested, Restricted
Delivery and by First Class Mail, upon those listed below:
Ms. Melissa A. Smith
8315 Parkview Avenue,
Munster, IN 46321
Said Service was completed on October 4, 2004, as is reflected on the Return
Receipt, a copy of which is attached.
cP~
John C. Porter, Esq.
Co-Counsel for Plaintiff
PA Sup. Ct. ID# 90152
61 W. Louther St.
Carlisle, PA 17013
717-249-1177
.. . .
.
. . Complete items 1.2.and.3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
. ..Printyour name and address on,the reverse
so that we can return. the card to you.
. Attach this card to the back of the mailplecEl,
or on. the front if space pennits.
1. Article Addressed to:
fY)S./?1eLl55C{ SmifH
f;;i l e;: Pl-1 ( /(v I e.....v ?fv c.
mu,>15T-{Y/ J AI
4 ~3.1.1
2. Article Number
(Transfer from serVice lab!
cE-S Form ::1811, FebrUB1Y 2004
COMPLETE TIll; ::'ECTlON ON DELlVEHY
A Slgnat~re
X\\[\,
B. Received by (PIt
\1\,1,\.1\\
0,19 delivery address different from Item 17
If YES, enter delivery sddress.below:
ery
3. ,Service "TYPe.
8'Certifled Mall tJ E><prass Mall
[J Registered 0 Return Recelp! for Merchandise
o Insured Mall 0 C.O.D.
4. Restricted Deliva!)'? (Extre Fee) es
7003 3110 0004 5771 7653
Do~;tic Return Receipt
102595..()2.M-1540
EXHIBIT [>
ROSALIE WALTERS
PLAINTIFF
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA
v.
03-2385 CIVIL ACTION LAW
STEVEN A. SMIm AND MELISSA A. SMIm
DEFENDANT
. IN CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW,
Tuesday, October 05, 2004
. upon consideration of the attached Complaint,
it is hereby directed that parties and their respective cOlmsel appear before Hubert X. Gilroy, Esq.
at 4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle on Thursday, November 11, 2004
, the conciliator,
at 8:30 AM
for a Pre-Hearing Custody Conference. At such conference, an effmi will be made to resolve the issues in dispute; or
if this cannot be accomplished, to define and narrow the issues to be heard by the court, and to enter into a temporary
order. All children age five or older may also be present at the conference, Failure to appear at the conference may
provide grounds for entry of a temporluy or pemlanent 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 couciliator 48 hours prior to scheduled hearinl(.
FOR THE COURT.
By: Isl
Huhert X. Gilroy, Esq.
Custody Conciliator
mhc
The Court of Cammon Pleas of Cumberland County is required by law to comply with the
Americans ,vith 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
I-IA VB 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 170] 3
Telephone (717) 249-3166
TRUE ~y RECORD
in TGsI-irr:();i;' fJT,'C set nil hand
and Thf:: s281 01 (".~,r.!n cr; Po.
Thi~ mu(euuuu cia\, or Qc:fuuu, <,~X:
""'.....,.....,~d1a..../t:F';~~~~
EXHIBIT E,
PENNSYL VANIA CONSOLIDATED STATUTES
TITLE 23. DOMESTIC RELATIONS
PART VI. CHILDREN AND MINORS
CHAPTER 53. CUSTODY
SUBCHAPTERB. CHILD CUSTODY JURISDICTION
23 Pa.C.S. S 5344 (2004)
S 5344. Jurisdiction
(a) GENERAL RULE.-- A court ofthis Commonwealth which is competent to decide
child custody matters has jurisdiction to make a child custody determination by initial or
modification decree if:
(l) this Commonwealth:
(i) is the home state of the child at the time of commencement of the
proceeding; or
(ii) had been the home state of the child within six montb.s before
commencement of the proceeding and the child is absent from this
Commonwealth because of his removal or retention by a person claiming
his custody or for other reasons, and a parent or person acting as
parent continues to live in this Commonwealth;
(2) it is in the best interest of the child that a court of this
Commonwealth assume jurisdiction because:
(i) the child and his parents, or the child and at least one
contestant, have a significant connection with this Commonwealth;
and
(ii) there is available in this Commonwealth substantial evidence
concerning the present or future care, protection, training and
personal relationships of the child;
(3) the child is physically present in this Commonwealth, 1md:
(i) the child has been abandoned; or
(ii) it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because he
~,l-
.,..
been subjected to or threatened with mistreatment or abuse or is
otherwise neglected or dependent;
(4) (i) it appears that no other state would have jurisdiction under
prerequisites substantially in accordance with paragraph (1), (2) or
(3), or another state has declined to exercise jurisdiction on the
ground that this Commonwealth is the more appropriate forum to
determine the custody of the child; and
(ii) it is in the best interest of the child that the court assume
jurisdiction; or
(5) the child welfare agencies of the counties wherein the contestants
for the child live, have made an investigation of the horn,: of the
person to whom custody is awarded and have found it to be satisfactory
for the welfare of the child.
(b) PHYSICAL PRESENCE INSUFFICIENT.-- Except under subsection (a)(3) and
(4), physical presence in this Commonwealth of the child, or of the child and one of the
contestants, is not alone sufficient to confer jurisdiction on a court of this Commonwealth
to make a child custody determination,
(c) PHYSICAL PRESENCE UNNECESSARY.-- Physical presence of the child, while
desirable, is not a prerequisite for jurisdiction to determine his custody.
EXHIBIT F
353
C"IFOR,I CHILD Cl'STODY JLTRISDICTIO" LAW
31-17-3-3
Home State. leOn t 'd)
_Not Found. rCont'dl
ll1inois, Indiana In,s not the "home state" of
the children and Incliand comts did not llal'e
Jurisdiction. In re J\Iayes, .52:3 !\.E.2c1 2-i9
Ind, App. 19881
_Temporary Absence.
\\'here Indiana was child's home stelte when
~':,,:'J':-r filed 3. petition for dissolution and
cclstodv, lllother's abduction of child did not
ch2',u:::~ the child'" home state because the
in\'ol~lnul'\- l'emoy.sl of a child \\-ould nece;:-
sanl,,- ,~on,stltute a .'temporary absence'
Ortman ':, Onman. 670 N.E.2d 1317 IInd
App.19961
\Vhere mother did not specify a elate certain
for resuming phYSical custody of daughter.
but both father and mother understood the
child's stay with father in Indiana IYoulcllast
approxim~tely four to six weeks. where at the
end of that time mother expressed her desire
to reassume custod\". but I\"as frustrated in
her attempts to do s~ over a period of approx-
imately six I\'eeks by practical. logistical dif-
ficulties. and where father then filed a disso-
lution action at a time such that it effectively
blocked mother's plan to regain physical cus-
tody of her daughter. the child's stay in Indi-
ana was a "temporary ab;:;ence~ within the
meaning of this section_ Stewart \' Stewart.
708 N.E.2d 903 IInd. App. 19991
Collateral References. Vihat types of
proceedings or determinations are governed
by the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction
Act I Uec.JA I or the Parental Kidnapping
Prevention Act IPKPAJ, 78 AL.R4th 1028.
Home state jurisdiction of court under
9 3( a)( 1) of the Vniform Child Custody .Juris-
diction Act (UCCJAI or the Parental Kidnap-
ping Prevention Act (PKPAJ. 28 uses
9 1738A(cJI2J1AI. 6 i\,L.R.5th 1.
International Custody Dispute.
The superior court pl'operl~' concludec lt did
not hs.\'E' jUri~rliction to decide the custody of
Italian-born. It31ian-rearecl [met Italian.resid-
ing children. gi\'en that Ital~- became the
children's "home state" b~' I'irtue of former IC
31-1-11.6-23's domestic incorporation )f the
Cniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act
[La\\']. and no showing could be made that
Italy did not baye jlU'iscllction to detenmne
child custody under ltS o\\"n la\\':> or that
parent woule! be denied due process if forced
to litigate cllstody in an Italian forum
Ruppen \". Ruppen. 61-J:- N.E.2c!S77 I Incl. App
19931.
Joint Legal Custody.
The use of the term "joint custody.' on one
page of the signed custody agreement. along
\vith an indication that the \-vife was to be the
"custodial" parent, was consistent with an
agreement of joint legal custody. Reno I',
R,der. 7-l3 N,E_:2d 1139 I Ind. App. 20011
State.
~ either the Pine Ridge Indian reser/at ion
nor the Oglala Sioux tribal court is within the
ambit of the definition of "state," J.Q_ y,
D,RL.. 525 N.E.2d 298 (Ind. 19881. ce::'t. de-
nied. 490 U.S. 1069. 109 S. CT. 2072. 104 L
Ed. 2d 636 119891,
Pending proceeding in another stE.te as
ground for declming Jurisdiction under.~ 61a)
of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act
I VCCJA I or the Parental Kidnapping Preven-
tion Act IPKPAI. 28 USCS * 1738Af,?l. 20
A.L.RSth 700.
Substantial conformity not found \vhere
other jurisdiction has not adopted UCc.JA. 20
A.L.R.5th 821.
31-17-3-3. Jurisdiction. - (al A court of this state which is competent
to decide child custody matters has jurisdiction to make a child custody
determination by initial or modification decree if:
11) this state (AI is the home state of the child at the tinc.e of
commencement of the proceeding, or I B I had been the child's home state
within six (61 months before commencement of the proceeding and the
child is absent from thie state because of his removal or retention by a
person claiming his custody or for other reasons. and a parent or person
acting as parent continues to live in this state;
(2) it is in the best interest ofthe child that a court of this state aSEUme
jurisdiction because ,AI the child and his parents, or the child and at
least one (1 ) contestant, have a significant connection \vith this state,
and IE) there is available in this state substantial evidence concerning
31-17-3-3
FAMILY LAW CUSTODY A;\D VISITATION RIGHTS
366
the child's present or future care, protection, training. and personal
relationships;
(3) the child is physically present in this state and the child has been
abandoned; or
(4) IAI it appears that no other state would have jurisdiction under
prerequisites substantially in accordance with paragraphs Ill, 12 I, or
(3), or another state has declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground
that this state is the more appropriate forum to determine the custody
of the child, and IB) it is in the best interest ofthe child that this court
assume jurisdiction.
Ib) Except under paragraphs (3) and 141 of subsection la) phYSical
presence in this state of the child, or of the child and one 11) of the
contestants, is not alone sufficient to confer jurisdiction on a court of this
state to make a child custody determination.
IcJ Physical presence of the child, while desirable, is not prerequisite for
jurisdiction to determine his custody.
[PL.1-1997, S 9.J
Res Gestae. Family law case update, 45
(No.3) Res Gestae 31 (2001).
Family Case Law Update: Filing of pater-
nity petition places custody in issue, 46 (No.
71 Hes Gestae 34 (20031.
A"IALYSIS
NOTES TO DECISIONS
In general.
Action pending in another state.
Applicability.
Best interests of child.
-In general.
-Eyidence.
-Evidence of present and future care,
-Evidence of present and future care.
Construction.
-Similarity to uniform act.
Contempt proceedings.
-Applicable Ia\-v.
-Interference with custodial rights,
Custody proceedings.
Emergency jurisdiction.
Evidence of present and future care.
Exclusive jurisdiction.
Failure to determine jurisdiction.
Home state of child.
-In general.
-Abduction of child.
-Failure to decline jurisdiction.
Inconvenient forum.
-Abuse of discretion,
International custody dispute.
Jurisdiction of court.
-I~l~roper forum.
-v\-alver.
Modification of foreign order.
Modification of own order.
More appropriate forum.
Personal jurisdiction.
Put.ative father.
Significant connection with state.
Visitation rights.
In General.
The "home state" concept confers subject
matter jurisdiction over the person of the
child without the necessity of physical pres-
ence. Clark v. Clark. 76 1m;. Dec. 1, 404
N.E.2d 23 IInd. App. 1980J.
Statutory scheme requires that IndianR H"
frain from modifying a child custody decrE'E-
ent,ered in another state which: III Had juris-
diction at the time the decree \vas entered. 12'
has continuing jurisdiction at the time thE
action to modify is filed in IndiRna. and 13 I
provides for the right to modification. Cox v
Le'vis, 5.36 N.E.2d 520 IInd. App. 19891.
Determining the "home state" of thl: child is
merely the first step in determining jurisdicn
tiO:1. A trial court must first determine
whether it has jurisdiction under the "home
state" test. If that test I:: met. the court must
then determine if it may exercise that juns~
diction. Ifthere is a custody proceeding pend.
ing: or a decree in another state which pres~
ently has jurisdiction, the court of the second
state may only exercise jurisdiction if 1:, it
ap~)ears to the court of the second state that
the court which rendereel the decree does not
no'^, have jurisdiction under the Uniform
Child Custody Jurisdiction Act [Law]. and 2)
the court of the second state has jurisdiction.
VERIFICATION
I, Steven A. Smith, verify that the statements made in this motion are true and
correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18
Pa. Cons. Stat. 94904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
Date: o~-fGJ'oce. 1:1. f!J ;}.ooo/
_-'C~/;::) ~ JUJ
Steven A. Smith
VERIFICATION
I, Rosalie E. Walters, verify that the statements made in this motion are true and
correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18
Pa. Cons. Stat. S4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
Date: ad (Q
0<-[
/)
lliu cJ <",'
Rosali,~ E. Walters
r
-
[v 4 {h/~
v.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, COMMONWEALTH
OF PENNSYLVANIA
ROSALIE E. W ALTERS,
Plaintiff
STEVEN A. SMITH AND
MELISSA A. SMITH,
Defendants
03-2385 CIVIL TERM
CUSTODY
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, John C. Porter, counsel for Steven A. Smith, hereby certify that a true and
correct copy of Motion Pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. ~5308 and Petition for Modification, was
served this 13th day of October, 2004, by First Class Mail, upon those listed below.
Ms. Melissa A. Smith
8315 Parkview Avenue
Munster, Indiana 46321
.p~
John C. Porter, Esq.
Co-Counsel for
Defendant Steven Smith
PA Sup. Ct. ID# 90152
61 W. Louther St.
Carlisle, PA 17013
717-249-1177
~ ~ I",~)
~ c~~.,
{":~',' '...J
.4 -, r
r-" r::-1
~ ~& --(
~ (":1 -
~ , c.......~
~ ~)
~ ~ ,
'voJ .
~ ':'.)
\J ,.
\:), \.1:.)
R. Thomas Kline, Sheriff, who being duly sworn according to law, states this
Writ is returned ABANDONED, no action taken in six months.
Sheriff's Costs:
Docketing
Poundage
Advertising
Law Library
Prothonotary
Mileage
Misc.
Surcharge
Levy
Post Pone Sale
Postage
Garnishee
TOTAL
So Answers;
Advance Costs:
Sheriff's Costs
150.00
69.75
80.25
18.00
1.37
.50
1.00
8.88
Refunded to Attyon 10/18/05
20.00
20.00
69.75
Sworn and Subscribed to before me
~.."' ~,.,
",,_/} J ;
~\" i~J. ."'" . "
-:" "". . ",,"llIl\IIIIIIl! "". ....,'-".
,. ..' "'''.,,,'ff.''
.
R. Thomas Klil~e., Sheriff .. I
By CJiliLP..l.l>- t,l\jLu)6r\C1l~
a
-c;
\~
\~ <l~
~'
"\,.\)\~,>(:'
~>
7~J~\
}..;
W
"'1
'\.
" . ",'l.l. S,.!\j'.1
,,\ " ['.11.::J.....
.
"'.~
tit 0
'"
;71:W
l.-'1.;
, -~-
"'~/'
~" "1
'.,::-
':' ~.~
AlII
,Ulu.."
; "I
.. ;,:3.)0
[
I,:''''
U' flipSI..
c. /
Gk /16/7\
WRIT OF EXECUTION and/or ATTACHMENT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA)
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND)
N004-2385 Civil
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
TO THE SHERIFF OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY:
To satisfy the debt, interest and costs due Barbara Sumple-Sullivan Plaintiff (s)
From Pamela S. Mattus
(I) You are directed to levy upon the property of the defendant (s)and to sell Any and All Property
located Bt 514 Partridge Court, Mechanicsburg, P A 17055
(2) You are also directed to attach the property of the defendant(s) not levied upon in the possession
of
GARNISHEE(S) as follows:
and to notify the garnishee(s) that: (a) an attachment has been issued; (b) the garnishee(s) is enjoined from
paying any debt to or for the account of the defendant (s) and from delivering any property of the defendant
(s) or otherwise disposing thereof;
(3) Ifproperty of the defendant(s) not levied upon an subject to attachment is found in the possession
of anyone other than a named garnishee, you are directed to notify hirnlher that he/she has been added as a
garnishee and is enjoined as above stated.
Amount Due$I,210.17
LL$0.50
Interest
Atty's Comm %
Atty Paid $36.75
Plaintiff Paid
Date: July 28, 2004
Due Prothy $1.00
Other Costs
CURTIS R. LONG
(Seal)
:;th1L fff/Wd.~
Deputy
REQUESTING PARTY:
Name Barbara Sumple-Sullivau, Esq.
Address: 549 Bridge Street
New Cumberlaud, PA 17070
Attorney for: Plaiutiff
Telephone: 717-774-1445
Supreme Court ID No. 32317