The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01-0765 v, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW ALAN E. LOVE, Plaintiff STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant IN CUSTODY _ -r: NO. 0)- 1/,.'[ C0J I ~ COMPLAINT FOR CUSTODY 1. The Plaintiff is Alan E. Love, residing at 723 Alberta Avenue, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2, The Defendant is Stephanie S. Love, residing at 20 Deer Cross Court, Reisterstown, Maryland. 3. Plaintiff seeks shared legal custody with a schedule of partial physical custody Montana Erin Love. The child was not born out of wedlock, The child is presently in the custody of mother who resides at 20 Deer Cross Court, Reisterstown, Maryland, Since her birth, Montana has resided with the following individuals and at the following addresses: Alan E. Love and Stephanie S. Love 723 Alberta Avenue birth to 10-4-00 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Stephanie S. Love, Melvin Sherin and Roberta Sherin 20 Deer Cross Court 10-4-00 to present Reisterstown, MD The mother of the child is Stephanie S. Love, currently residing at 20 Deer Cross Court, Reisterstown, Maryland. She is married. The father of the child is Alan E. Love currently residing at 723 Alberta Avenue, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. He is married. 4. The relationship of Plaintiff to the child is that of father, The Plaintiff currently resides alone. 5. The relationship of Defendant to the child Is that of mother. The Defendant currently resides with the following persons: Name Relationship Montana Erin Love Melvin and Roberta Sherin Daughter Parents 6. Plaintiff has not participated as a party or witness, or in another capacity, in other litigation conceming the custody of the children in this or another court. Plaintiff has no information of a custody proceeding conceming the child 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 child or claims to have custody or visitation rights with respect to the child. 7, The best interest and permanent welfare of the child will be served by granting the relief requested because: it is in the best interest of the child to maintain a good, meaningful relationship with both parents and a regular schedule of contact with father is necessary to accomplish this. 8, Each parent whose parental rights to the child have not been terminated and the person who has physical custody of the child have been named as parties to this action. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests the Court to grant shared legal custody with a schedule of partial custody of the child to him. TUCKER ARENSBERG & SWARTZ 111 North Front Street P.O. Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0889 (717) 234-4121 AlTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 35868,1 FER 0 9 ?O~ o tZ'IG-I!J4 L <: ---- VERIFICATION I, the undersigned Alan E. Love, acknowledge that the facts stated in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. 't Alan E. Lc ve ./ , Dated: L - O~ -61 RECEIVED AUG 08 ZOOSI' Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ALAN E. LOVE, vs. 01-765 CNIL ACTION LAW STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant IN CUSTODY ORDER AND NOW, this 2nd day of AUl!:ust,2005 , the conciliator, being advised by counsel for the parties that all custody issues have finally been resolved by agreement of the parties, hereby relinquishes jurisdiction. The Custody Conciliation Conference scheduled for August 3, 2005 is cancelled. FOR THE COURT, ~~~ r- Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire Custody Conciliator ~~ ~ &- 1"?:i -g ,,::;,D7- 'tit'! <it- 0:f: i;'f~ d' ""S.~ .~ \ '\,~{b .... G2 ~4'"\~ ~ '*- "t~'6 't:> <? 0-3 :c c::: > n '" ~ '" - '" :;0 '" - c z~ ~ 0 ~ ;,,~~ .9 010 Z N ~t.:llen w ... ~~OI:C .. ~gg~~ Ei 2:;"''''0 > ~ Ro ~ men 0 ~ >-l::E b ~ > ~ ~ ca N (J \ , > br,\ c :A:J G ..J:::. q V ~ .,.,... I VI ..I .\l:: 15 ;!J c", 0, C, .:.:; ~ J "" -+-> :'31 ""', C'_ ~ -G .s: -,..\ ?- ';$ ~ )-- , CL ,.r~ ~ cr ,,~ :> ~ ALAN E. LOVE PLAINTIFF V, STEPHANIE S. LOVE DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA 01-765 CIVIL ACTION LAW IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 14th day of February, 2001, upon consideration of the attached Complaint, it is hereby directed that the parties and their respective counsel appear before Dawu S. Sunday, Esq. , the conciliat at 39 West Maiu Street, Mechauicsburg, PA 17055 _ onthe _ 28th day of February ,200], at 1:00 p.m. 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 tbe 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, Fai]ure to appear at the conference may provide grounds for entry of a temporary or permanent order. FOR THE COURT, By: Isl Dawn S. Sunday, E~ 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 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Telephone (717) 249-3166 ~ $.P 7 ~l?r;/ ~ ? ~n/ ~ ~ ~~~~.Jp ,., .., ... .', . ~ . , " .:.~ I t?5'/- c: /{75/- C' ;{/'57e ", ~ ....LAN E. LOVE, Plaintiff v. STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant TUCKER ARENSBERG & SWARTZ III NORTH FRONT STREET P,O, BOX 889 HARRISBURG. PENNSYLVANIA 17108-0889 (717) 234-4121 -,--- IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : IN CUSTODY : NO, 01-765 ACCEPTANCEOFSER~CE I accept service of the Complaint for Custody along with an Order of Court setting a custody conference in the above matter on behalf of the Defendant, Stephanie S. Love, Date: r9-! ,,;1 <J-( '" I 37040.1 ~ _,L, G f'- rra , Esquire, Esquire 20 Linglestown Road, Suite 201 Harrisburg, PA 17110 ALAN E. LOVE, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : vs. : NO. 01-765 CIVIL TERM : STEPHANIE S. LOVE, : CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendant : IN CUSTODY aIDER OF CXXJRT AND lOt, this '2. '1 ~ day of consideration of the attached Custody and directed as follows: VVI '2.J C L. Conciliation , 2001, upon Report, it is ordered 1. 1he Mother, Stephanie S. Love, and the Father, Alan E. Love, shall have shared legal custody of Montana Erin Love, born December 30, 1999. Each parent shall have an equal right, to be exercised jointly with the other parent, to make all major non-emergency decisions affecting the Child's general well-being including, but not limited to, all decisions regarding her health, education and religion. 2. 1he Mother shall have primary physical custody of the Child. 3. The Father shall have superviSed periods of custody with the Child in accordance with the following schedule: A. The Father shall have custody of the Child on Sunday, April 8, 2001 from 12:00 noon through 4:00 p.m. and on Sunday, April 22, 2001 from 12:00 noon through 5:00 p.m. The exchanges of custody under this subparagraph shall take place at the Father's residence in Pennsylvania. B. 1he Father shall also have custody of the Child on Easter sunday in 2001 from 12:30 p.m. until 2:30 p.m. The Father shall exercise his period of custody on Easter in the locale of the Mother's residence in Maryland. C. Beginning on Sunday, April 29, 2001 and continuing thereafter, pending the second Conciliation Conference, the Father shall have custody on alternating Sundays in Maryland from 12:00 p.m. until 4:00 p.m. and on the interim Sundays in Pennsylvania from 12:00 noon through 5:00 p.m. D. The Father's periods of custody shall be supervised at all times by either the Father's parents or another adult individual who is acceptable to both parties. 4. 1he parties shall be flexible in making adjustments to the days on which the periods of superviSed custody are scheduled to accommodate the ~I D, "j " I\C '.-'..~'. "', . Father's ability to arrange for supervision or other exigent circumstances. The parties shall also be flexible in adjusting the duration of the periods of custody as necessary for the Child's benefit. 5. The Mother shall provide all transportation for periods of custody which take place in Pennsylvania and the Father shall provide all transportation, subject to the condition in provision 6, for all periods of custody which take place in Maryland. 6. During the first two months of the custody schedule beginning on April 8, 2001, the Father shall not drive with the Child in the vehicle but shall instead designate another responsible adult with a valid license to drive. 7. 1he Father shall ensure that the Child is transported at all times in an appropriate car seat. 8. The Father shall follow all recommendations of his counselor, Deborah Salem and psychologist, Shawna Brent, with respect to the frequency, duration and nature of treatment. Through counsel, the Father shall provide to the Mother weekly compliance reports and testing results from Deborah Salem as well as the treatment regimen recommended by the Father's psychologist. 9. The Mother shall provide to the Father a copy of the requested medical records for the Child. 10. The parties and counsel shall attend a second Conciliation Conference in the office of the Conciliator, Dawn S. Sunday, on August 7, 2001, at 11:00 a.m. 11. This Order is entered pursuant to an agreement of the parties at a Custody conciliation Conference. The parties may modify the provisions of this Order by mutual consent. In the absence of mutual consent, the terms of this Order shall control. BY THE COURT, J V)~~ull J. cc: Sandra L. Meilton, Esquire - COunsel for Father Lori K. Serratelli, Esquire - Counsel for Mothers t ~,~~\ ALAN E. LOVE, : IN THE COURT OF COMMCN PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : vs. : NO. 01-765 CIVIL TERM : STEPHANIE S. LOVE, : CIVIL ACTION - LAW Defendant : IN CUSTODY aJS'lOOY cx:NCILIATIOO 8U'IMARY REPCRT IN ACCXIIDANCE Wl'l'H cnmERLAND caJN'l'Y RULE OF CIVIL PROCEOORE 1915.3-8, the undersigned Custody Conciliator submits the following report: 1. The pertinent information concerning the Child who is the subject of this litigation is as follows: NAME DIl.7E OF BIRTH aJRRml'Ly IN aJS'lOOY OF Montana Erin Love December 30, 1999 Mother 2. A Conciliation Conference was held on March 21, 2001, with the following individuals in attendance: 1he Father, Alan E. Love, with his counsel, Sandra L. Meil ton , Esquire, and the Mother, Stephanie S. Love, with her counsel, Lori K. Serratelli, Esquire. 3. Much to their credit under very difficult circumstances, the parties were able to establish initial custody arrangements by agreement. The parties agreed to entry of an Order in the form as attached. I neucJ.- d-e;}, de.vl Date Lc: Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire Custody Conciliator . ALAN E. LOVE, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 01-765 CIVIL TERM STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant CIVIL ACTION -law IN CUSTODY o c;:; G; .n ?"':J ""D ~'; . '0 fT',j.' Z-:::" -./1'- , (f) -< ~l.) ..-::1 2?;(: --..'" ~-c\ _ ::Pc .- Z ? AND NOW, this lo/-b day of ~C' ~t- ....6e1 ,20~1, ;on consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows: ORDER OF COURT \:.~ t~ :-~ ~ ~ 1. The prior Order of this Court dated March 29,2001 is vacated and replaced with this Order. 2. The Mother, Stephanie S. Love, and the Father, Alan E. Love, shall have shared legal custody of Montana Erin Love, born December 30, 1999. Each parent shall have an equal right, to be exercised jointly with the other parent, to make all major non-emergency decisions affecting the Child's general well-being including, but not limited to, all decisions regarding her health, education and religion. 3. The Mother shall have primary physical custody ofthe Child. 4. The Father shall have supervised periods of custody with the Child during alternating weeks on Fridays in the locale of the Mother's residence in Maryland from 10:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. For his periods of custody in Maryland, the Father shall pick up the Child at the maternal grandparents' home at the beginning of his period of custody and return the Child to the maternal grandparents' home at the conclusion of his custodial period. During the interim weekends, the Father shall have supervised custody of the Child from Saturday at 12:00 noon through Sunday at 2:00 p.m. in Pennsylvania. For the alternating weekend periods of custody, the parties shall exchange custody of the Child at the Hillcrest Restaurant in Littlestown, P A. The alternating weekend periods of custody shall begin on Saturday, September 8, 2001, and the alternating Friday periods of custody shall begin on August 31, 2001, unless the parties agree to begin on August 30. 5. The Father's periods of custody shall be supervised at all times by either of the Father's parents or another adult individual who is acceptable to both parties. , 6. The parties shall be flexible in making adjustments to the days on which the periods of supervised custody are scheduled to accommodate the Father's ability to arrange for supervision or other exigent circumstances. The parties shall also be flexible in adjusting the duration of the periods of custody as necessary for the Child's benefit. 7. Both parties shall ensure that the Child is transported at all times in an appropriate car seat. 8. The Father shall follow all recommendations of his counselor, Deborah Salem and psychologist, Shawna Brent, with respect to the frequency, duration and nature of treatment. Through counsel, the Father shall provide the Mother with weekly compliance reports from Deborah Salem as well as the treatment regiment recommended by the Father's psychologist. 9. Beginning in mid-October (or at such time as the Father's physician at Johns Hopkins indicates it would be appropriate to resume drug testing without hindrance by the Father's prescribed medications) the Father shall submit to random drug testing (full drug screening) 2 times per month. During January and February 2002, the random drug testing shall increase to 1 time per week in preparation for the parties' consideration of unsupervised periods of partial custody for the Father. The Mother's counsel shall notify the Father's counsel of the time period in which the testing will take place for each random test. The tests shall be scheduled in a reasonable manner to ensure the Father's availability and availability of the testing laboratory. The Father shall authorize his family physician to provide the drug testing results directly to the Mother's counsel, who, in turn, will provide the results to the Father's counsel. The parties shall equally share all costs of drug testing. 10. On or before March 1, 2002, the Father shall obtain a written report from his counselor, Deborah Salem, specifically addressing the Father's readiness for and the advisability of initiating unsupervised periods of custody. Within the same time frame, the Father shall obtain a written report from his psychologist, Shawna Brent, concerning the effect of the Father's medications on his ability to function in an unsupervised custodial role. 11. If the parties are not able to resolve the outstanding custody issues after reviewing the drug testing history and the reports from Deborah Salem and Shawna Brent, counsel for either party may contact the Conciliator to schedule an additional Custody Conciliation Conference. 12. The parties shall participate in joint counseling with a professional selected by agreement. The purpose of the counseling shall be to improve communications and establish a cooperative parenting relationship between the parties. All unreimbursed costs of counseling shall be shared equally by the parties. 13 Pending further Order of Court or agreement of the parties, the Mother shall have custody of the Child on Thanksgiving, Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur and Passover and the Father shall have custody on Easter Sunday and from Christmas Eve at 12:00 noon through Christmas Day at 5:00 p.m. Child. 14. The Mother shall provide to the Father a copy of the requested medical records for the 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. BY THE COURT, CJ;I( J. Cc: Sandra 1. Meilton, Esquire - Counsel for Father Donald T. Kissinger, Esquire - Counsel for Mother ,.~ ~ '1-p-OI q.. ALAN E. LOVE, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : NO. 01-765 CIVIL TERM STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant 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: I. The pertinent information concerning the Child who is the subj ect of this litigation is as follows: NAME DATE OF BIRTH CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF Montana Erin Love December 30,1999 Mother 2. A Conciliation Conference was held on August 29, 2001, with the following individuals in attendance: The Father, Alan E. Love, with his counsel, Sandra 1. Meilton, Esquire, and the Mother, Stephanie S. Love, with her counsel, Donald T. Kissinger, Esquire. 3. The parties agreed to entry of an Order in the form as attached. Date ;;1'J~ ~~ DaSbsu&i~ Custody Conciliator ALAN E. LOVE, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. 01-765 CIVIL ACTION LAW STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 7_~t( day of () C~Lr) ,2002, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows: 1. The Prior Order of this Court dated September 10, 2001 is vacated and replaced with this Order. 2. The parties shall participate in joint counseling with a professional selected by agreement. The purpose of the counseling shall be to improve communication and establish a cooperative parenting relationship between the parties. The parties shall attend a minimum of 5 joint sessions with the counselor and shall equally share all costs of counseling which are not covered by insurance. The parties shall follow the recommendations of the counselor with respect to the duration and frequency of the counseling sessions. 3. The Father, Alan E. Love, and the Mother, Stephanie S. Love, shall have shared legal custody of Montana Erin Love, born December 30, 1999. Each parent shall have an equal right, to be exercised jointly with the other parent, to make all major non-emergency decisions affecting the Child's general well-being including, but not limited to, all decisions regarding her health, education and religion. Pursuant to the terms of this paragraph each parent shall be entitled to all records and information pertaining to the Child including, but not limited to, school and medical records and information. The Father's agreement that the Child may continue in her current day care program at the Jewish Community Center which includes a minor component of religious instruction one day per week shall be without prejudice to any subsequent position taken by the Father in opposition to enrollment of the Child in a religious based school in the future. 4. The Mother shall have primary physical custody ofthe Child. 5. The Father shall have partial physical custody of the Child on alternating weekends from Friday at 4:00 p.m. through Sunday at 4:00 p.m., beginning on Friday, October 11, 2002. In addition, the Father shall be entitled to have custody of the Child on a weekday between the Father's weekends \,'i:,!\:~Y\\~}:N?d A.!..i\T]I:-~--' " !,,'n8 ;:: I :! I'. "} (" i'. lJU from 3:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m., upon providing notice to the Mother by 7:00 p.m. on the evening before the day on which the Father intends to exercise his period of custody. The Father's periods of weekday evening custody shall not be scheduled on Fridays immediately preceding the Mother's weekend period of custody. 6. The parties shall share or alternate having custody of the Child on holidays as follows: A. THANKSGIVING: The Thanksgiving period of holiday custody shall run from the Wednesday before Thanksgiving at 4:00 p.m. through the Sunday following Thanksgiving at 4:00 p.m. The Mother shall have custody of the Child over Thanksgiving in even numbered years and the Father shall have custody in odd numbered years. B. CHRISTMAS: In even numbered years, the Father shall have custody of the Child from Christmas Eve at 12:00 noon through January 1 at 4:00 p.m. In odd numbered years, the Father shall have custody of the Child from Christmas Eve at 12:00 noon through December 29 at 4:00 p.m. In 2002, the alternating weekend schedule shall resume with the Father having custody on Friday, January 10. In the event Hanukah falls during the Christmas holiday period of custody, the parties shall make an adjustment to the schedule so that the Mother has custody of the Child on Hanukah. In the event Hanukah and Christmas fall on the same day, the parties shall share the holiday as arranged by agreement. C. ROSH HASHANAH,YOM KIPPUR,PASSOVER, HANUKAH: The Mother shall have custody of the Child for Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Passover and Hanukah each year from the night before the holiday at 3:00 p.m. through the day following the holiday at 12:00 noon. D. EASTER: The Father shall have custody of the Child over the Easter holiday each year from the Thursday before Easter at 4:00 p.m. through Easter Sunday at 4:00 p.m. Due to Passover in 2003, the Father's Easter holiday period of custody shall begin on Friday at 10:00 a.m. In the event that Passover falls during the Father's Easter period of holiday custody in the future, the parties shall make an adjustment to the schedule so that the Mother has custody on Passover. In the event Passover and Easter fall on the same day, the parties shall share the holiday as arranged by agreement. E. MEMORIAL DAY, JULY 4TH, LABOR DAY: The Memorial Day and Labor Day holiday periods of custody shall run from Saturday at 12:00 noon through Monday at 6:00 p.m. and the July 4th holiday shall run from July 3'd at 7:00 p.m. through July 5th at 7:00 p.m. In odd numbered years, the Mother shall have custody of the Child over Memorial Day and Labor Day and the Father shall have custody over the July 4th holiday. In even numbered years, the Father shall have custody of the Child for Memorial Day and Labor Day and the Mother shall have custody during the July 4th holiday. F. MOTHER'S DAY/FATHER'S DAY: The Mother shall have custody of the Child every year on Mother's Day and the Father shall have custody of the Child every year on Father's Day from Friday at 4:00 p.m. through Sunday at 4:00 p.m. G. The holiday custody schedule shall supersede and take precedence over the regular custody schedule. 7. Each party shall be entitled to have custody of the Child for 2 non-consecutive weeks each summer upon providing at least 60 days advance notice to the other party. The party providing notice first shall be entitled to have preference on the selection of his or her vacation dates. The vacation periods of custody under this provision shall be no more than 7 days in duration and shall be scheduled to include the party's regular weekend period of custody. 8. The non-custodial parent shall be entitled to have telephone contact with the Child I time per day. 9. The party receiving custody shall be responsible to provide transportation for the exchange of custody. All exchanges of custody shall take place at the parties' residences unless agreed otherwise. 10. Neither party shall do or say anything which may estrange the Child from the other parent, injure the opinion ofthe Child as to the other parent, or hamper the free and natural development ofthe Child's love and respect for the other parent. Both parties shall ensure that third parties having contact with the Child comply with this provision. 11. This Order is entered pursuant to an agreement of the parties at a Custody Conciliation Conference. The parties may modify the provisions of this Order by mutual consent. In the absence of mutual consent, the terms of this Order shall control. BYTHEUi.T. (0 j J. sley Oler, J;a L 0/~ J. cc: Sandra L. Meilton, Esquire - Counsel for Father Donald T. Kissinger, Esquire - Counsel for Mother .~ ~ 10 ;1.5--6.21 9- ALAN E. LOVE, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. 01-765 CNIL ACTION LAW STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant 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: 1. The pertinent information concerning the Child who is the subject of this litigation is as follows: NAME DATE OF BIRTH CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF Montana Erin Love December 30, 1999 Mother 2. A Conciliation Conference was held on October 10, 2002, with the following individuals in attendance: The Father, Alan E. Love, with his counsel, Sandra 1. Meilton, Esquire and the Mother, Stephanie S. Love, with her counsel, Donald T. Kissinger, Esquire. Date 3. The parties agreed to entry of an Order)l,1 the form as attached. OCbfhr./l 1)- a-CeJri- (.(/r;M~~ , Dawn S. S~~d~y, E;q~irJ Custody Conciliator v. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW ALAN E. LOVE, Plaintiff STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant IN CUSTODY NO. 01-765 PETITION FOR MODIFICATION 1. Plaintiff and Defendant are the parents of one minor daughter, Montana Erin Love, born December 30, 1999. 2. Plaintiff desires to modify the Order dated October 24, 2002 in several respects. 3. Said Order states, in part, at Paragraph 9, that all exchanges of custody shall take place at the parties' residences unless agreed otherwise. 4. Plaintiff has recently moved to his girlfriend's home. 5. The parties have a strained relationship. 6. In the past, Defendant has behaved inappropriately at custodial exchanges at the parties' marital residence and at Plaintiff's previous residence. 7. Plaintiff does not want to subject his girlfriend, her 8 year old child or their neighbors to an incident between the parties. 8. The exchange of custody on Sunday, October 5, 2003 was done at the Karns grocery store parking lot at the Hampden Center on the Carlisle Pike in Mechanicsburg, PA and the exchange went well. 9. When visitations were supervised, without Defendant's objection, exchanges were conducted at both the Giant grocery store parking lot in Dillsburg, PA and at a restaurant in Littlestown, PA (the midpoint between the parties' respective homes). 10. Plaintiff avers that nothing will be gained by having an exchange of custody at his new home. 11. Plaintiff requests that pick up and drop off locations be moved to neutral locations rather than at the parties' respective residences. 12. Plaintiff requests a modification to Paragraph 5 of the Order to allow him to pick up his daughter earlier on a Friday for his alternating weekends and also to change the times of weekday visitation to be between 4:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. rather than 3:00 to 7:00 p.m. 13. Plaintiff requests a change to Paragraph 8 of the Order. 14. Plaintiff further requests a general review of the existing Order. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests the Court to schedule a custody conciliation conference in connection with the within Petition. ~~d:~/~ . TUCKER ARENSBERG, P.C. 111 North Front Street P.O. Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0889 (717) 234-4121 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 63048.1 VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, Alan E. Love, acknowledge that the facts stated in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, informal' 1 understand that any false statements herein arGo ade ubj 18 Pa. C.SA Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to aLltho itie;. ~ Dated: Jo -- 6 - 0.1 \. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this 7 </-1, day of oth, b.{}( ,2003, I, Gloria M. Rine, Paralegal, for the firm of Tucker Arensberg, P.C., hereby certify that I have this day served a copy of the within document, by mailing same by first class mail, addressed as follows: Donald T. Kissinger, Esquire P.O. Box 810 Harrisburg, PA 17108 < ~. (!~ Gloria M. Rine ~ ~ -lQ ,--; '-,,-,; t1 ~:::> --.J -1 - tv 0 , ...... .c:. 6' (> w ..... ,- ., - CY~ , ; t: -- - .. ~ -- ) CT, -, ALAN E. LOVE PLAINTIFF IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. 01-765 C1VIL ACTION LAW STEPHANIE S. LOVE DEFENDANT lN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, Thursday, October 09, 2003 , 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, November 12, 2003 at 10:00 AM for a Pre-Hearing Custody Conference. At such conference, an effort will be made to resolve the issues in dispute; or if this cannot be accomplished, to define and narrow the issues to be heard by the court, and to enter into a temporary order. All children age five or older may also be present at the conference. Failure to appear at the conference may provide grounds for entry of a temporary or permanent order. The court hereby directs the parties to furnish any and all existing Protection from Abuse orders, Special Relief orders, and Custody orders to the conciliator 48 hours prior to scheduled hearin2. FOR TIlE COURT. By: Isl Dawn S. Sunday, Esq. Custody Conciliator L- 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 HA VB AN ATTORNEY OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE TIlE 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 ~rw-;::,#z:v ~ ~~ td'p? l(J.t,. 0/ ~~ '7 ~ ~~ ~/7!;W ~ ~ 12 ~ J!/rt9 I1J g)-IF rl( \/!\:',/,',-' I,....., 1" r- > ",. ',',J' 1,\>,:".,.. ...;.-/ AJI\!("/'" -. .. ' , '._.~- rr) [iU::: , '! - :: ~- .~ ,_IJ ; .-: JUN r 2004 ALAN E. LOVE Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. 01-765 CIVIL ACTION LAW STEPHANIE S. LOVE Defendant IN CUSTODY ORDER AND NOW, this 15th day of June. 2003 , the conciliator, being advised by plaintiffs counsel that all custody issues have been resolved by agreement of the parties, hereby relinquishes jurisdiction. FOR THE COURT, LJ~(r Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire Custody Conciliator 'V!N'ii\1}.si\jl~3d }J.!\!nCC- ,>/';:FF~V,.;n'J LO;\ ~!d +]2 i'lOnnnl AU'fLDNOH.LO:Jd 3Hl :10 :\8i:i3D-{]J11:l ALAN E. LOVE, Plaintiff v. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant IN CUSTODY NO. 01-765 PETITION REQUESTING CUSTODY CONCILIATION CONFIERENCE 1. Plaintiff and Defendant are the parents of one minor daughter, Montana Erin Love, born December 30, 1999. 2. Custody of the parties' daughter is outlined! in an Order dated October 24, 2002. 3. Paragraph 3 states that the parties shall shslre legal custody. 4. Plaintiff had concerns about the amount of religious education Montana was receiving at the Jewish Community Center, the location where Montana has attended preschool. 5. Plaintiff advised Defendant's counsel by letter dated June 23, 2004 that Plaintiff did not want Montana returned to the preschool at the Jewish Community Center for the 2004-2005 school year. 6. Plaintiff researched several schooling alternatives close to Defendant's home and her place of employment and provided said information to Defendant's counsel in said letter dated June 23, 2004. 7. Plaintiff's counsel wrote again to Defendant's counsel by letter dated July 19, 2004 regarding this issue. 8. Although no written response has been received from Defendant's counsel concerning this issue, Defendant's counsel advised Plaintiff's counsel that Defendant wished to communicate directly with Plaintiff with respect thereto. 9. Defendant has not discussed this issue with Plaintiff. 10. Plaintiff requests the scheduling of a custody conciliation. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests the Court to schedule a custody conciliation conference in connection with the within Petition. .l \ L~,~}rt-i&;;-r,-/ Sandra L. Meilton, Esq'uire 70994.1 TUCKER ARENSBERG, P.C. 111 North Front Stre,et P.O. Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 17108-0889 (717) 234-4121 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, Alan E. Love, acknowled~le that the facts stated in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my knowlEldge, information and belief. 1 understand that any false statements herein are bject to he penalties of 18 Pa. C.S.A. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification t ities Dated: ~ -lc- oy --" CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND NOW, this :?3tC Iday of ~'f , 2004, I, Gloria M. Rine, Paralegal, for the firm of Tucker Arensberg, P.C., hereby certify that I have this day served a copy of the within document, by mailing same by first class mail, addressed as follows: Donald T. Kissinger, Esquire P.O. Box 810 Harrisburg, PA 17108 d~L Gloria M. Rine f\~ ......... w 8 ~ "'0 ~ ~ f! t:; 3- r--.,~ ~:,,:-; '.-, I. '., ~ ,.., " roo) -," 1~'.J r,) c, ~ ALAN E. LOVE PLAINTIFF lN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. 01-765 CIV1L ACTION LAW STEPHANIE S. LOVE DEFENDANT lN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, Tuesday, Au~ust 31,2004 , upon consideration of the attached Complaint, it is hereby directed that parties and their respective counsel appear before nawn S. Sunday, Esq. at 39 West Main Street, Mechanicsburg, FA 17055 on Tuesday, September 28, 2004 , the conciliator, at 10:00 AM for a Pre-Hearing Custody Conference. At such conference, an etTort will be made to resolve the issues in dispute; or if this cannot be accomplished, to define and narrow the issues to be heard by the court, and to enter into a temporary order. All children age five or older may also be present at the conference. Failure to appear at the conference may provide grounds for entry of a temporary or permanent order. The court hereby directs the parties to furnish any and all existing Protection from Abuse orders, Special Relief orders, and Custody orders to the conciliator 48 hours prior to scheduled hearinl/:. FOR THE COURT, By: Isl Dawn S. Sunday, Esq. Custody Conciliator mhc 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 accessiblt~ 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 HA VE AN ATTORNEY OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE IRE 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 ~F~ ~ ~ )~!-6 ~ -1P ~ ~ ~l?, /!o,/'f; ~ fp f:-~ ~-n /1~/'6 \-I'I"IW' I L^ln'r','''\ IASN.r.;:;-1 ^" ,<'"": r~~ ~ '~",,, , !,.',./ "r.:'!'C"'''n.'''' , '...,:-'~Iy 'J t ~ : 1/ f.I~ 1- d3S ~OOl AWlONOH10od 3Hl dO 3:J1:L,CKJ3l8 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY NISlTATION ALAN E. LOVE, Plaintiff NO. 01-765 CIVIL TERM STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE AND NEW MATTER TO PLAINTIFF'S PETITION REOUESTING CUSTODY CONCILIATION CONFERENCE AND NOW, comes Defendant, Stephanie S. Love ("Mother"), by and through her counsel, Howett, Kissinger & Conley, P .C., who hereby submits the following Response and New Matter to Plaintiffs ("Father") Petition Requesting Custody Conciliation Conference and states as follows: 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. By way of further response, said order affords Mother primary physical custody and Father periods of partial custody. 3. Admitted. 4. Neither admitted nor denied as Mother is without knowledge as to what concerns Father has (or had) as to the amount of religious education the child is receiving at the Jewish Community Center. To the extent a response is required, Mother denies that it is not in the best interests ofthe child to continue attending the Jewish Community Center. Father is deeply anti-semitic; Father has made it known to Mother that he does not like the child attending the Jewish Community Center. Mother is Jewish, and during the marriage, the child was raised in the Jewish faith by agreement ofthe parties. Subsequent to separation, the child has continued to be raised in the Jewish faith; she has attended to the Jewish Community Center for three years, and Father has long known that the child attended the Center, and he tacitly agreed to the enrollment. Father became upset when Mother informed him that she intended to continue to enroll the child at the Jewish Community Center, even though enrollment with the Center can go only up to Kindergarten. Hence, the filing for Father's petition. Nevertheless, while the parties do share legal custody, the reality is that, if the parties cannot agree as to the selection of a preschool program, then the ultimate decision rests with the parent who has primary physical custody, which is Mother. Mother did discuss this matter with Father, as she has done throughout the time the child has attended the Jewish Community Center. Mother did not agree with Father that it was in the child's best interests to discontinue the Jewish Community Center at this time. Furthermore, the child resides in Maryland, which is where the Center is located. 5. Admitted. By way of further response, the child previously attended preschool at the Jewish Community Center. Father maintains that the child should not continue at the Center notwithstanding the child's prolonged contacted with the organization and the friendships developed over the course of time that the child has attended the Center. Furthermore, as primary physical custodian, Mother must make the ultimate decision as to the child's preschool program when the parties are not in accord. 6. Neither admitted nor denied as Mother is without knowledge as to Father's activities and whether he researched schooling alternatives. To the extent a response is required, it is denied that it is not in the child's best interests to continue attending the Jewish Community Center. By way of further response, Mother maintains that the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania is an inconvenient forum to hear this matter. Mother and the child have resided in the state of Maryland since 2000; not only is Maryland now the "home state" of the child under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, but inasmuch as the issue at hand concerns the child's schooling in Marvland, Maryland has the most significant connection to the child and this particular issue (not Pennsylvania despite its initial custody order and the fact that Father remains a Pennsylvania resident) given the fact that any and all of the witnesses germane to this issue, save for Father himself, are located in Maryland. 7. Admitted. By way of further response, Mother denies it is in the best interests of the child to stop going to the Jewish Community Center at this time. Moreover, Mother continues to try to communicate directly with Father on custody issues, but to no avail. 8. Admitted. By way of further response, Mother continues to try to communicate directly with Father on all issues relating to the care and custody ofthe child, but, however, Father has heretofore refused to communicate directly to Mother, or when he does communicate, he does not do so in good faith. Rather, he continues to demand that Mother use her attorney, thereby generating extensive costs. Mother believes that it is better for the child and the parties to develop and maintain effective communication between the parents. To that end, Mother did talk to Father about the child's preschool and the fact that she would continue to attend the Jewish Community Center. Mother has historically tried to communicate with Father on all issues concerning the child. Regrettably, Father has a different opinion as to where the child should attend preschool. Mother believes that his dislike of the Jewish Community Center stems from his anti-semitic beliefs. 9. Denied. Mother expressly denies that she has not discussed the issue of the child's pre-schooling with Father or has attempted to discuss the issue. The child has attended the Jewish Community Center for the last three years, a fact well known to Father. Father has simply taken it upon himselfto file the instant petition because he does not like the fact that the child continues to be raised in the Jewish faith. 10. Neither admitted nor denied as said paragraph constitutes a prayer for reliefto which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, and as set more fully in the New Matter set forth below, Mother believes that this Court is the wrong forum to address this issue. Mother and the child have resided in Maryland since 2000, and Maryland is now not only the "home state" ofthe child under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, but it also has a more significant connection to the child and the issue at hand inasmuch as it is clear that the child will attend school, wherever that may be, in Maryland. WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests the Court deny Plaintiffs Request for a Custody Conciliation Conference and dismiss the instant Petition. NEW MATTER 11. The prior paragraphs of this Response are hereby incorporated by reference thereto as if set forth at length herein. 12. In Pennsylvania, when determining proper jurisdiction for resolving custody disputes, courts must look at 95344 of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act ("UCCJA"). 13. Pursuant to the UCCJA, a Pennsylvania court continues to have jurisdiction over its previously entered custody order if it remains the "home state" of the child or it retains a significant connection to the child or one ofthe parties. 23 Pa.C.S.A. 95344(a). 14. For all custody disputes, even these implicating the UCCJA, the paramount concern is the best interests ofthe child. Baines v. Williams, 635 A.2d 1077 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1993). 15. Moreover, when ruling on jurisdiction, the court must look at the issue at the time the pending proceeding is commenced, not before or after. Black v. Black, 657 A.2d 964 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1995). 16. Although Pennsylvania admittedly has continuing jurisdiction to modify the existing custody order in this case, it is without question that the home state of a child is the preferred forum to resolve custody matters and the preferred jurisdiction for custody proceedings. Boudwin v. Boudwin, 615 A.2d 786 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1992). 17. Under 95343 of the UCCJA, the "home state" of a child is the state in which the child has resided for at least the last six (6) consecutive months. 18. Mother and the child have resided in the state of Maryland since 2000; therefore, under the UCCJA, Maryland is now the "home state" ofthe child and has been for the last four years. 19. Because Maryland is the "home state," it can properly exercise jurisdiction over the instant custody proceeding. 20. Where two or more states may properly exercise jurisdiction under the UCCJA, the court should determine which forum is most convenient to resolve the issue at hand. 21. The UCCJA, 23 Pa.C.S.A.95348, provides that a court, which has jurisdiction, may decline to exercise continuing jurisdiction if it determines that it is now an inconvenient forum to make an appropriate custody determination and that a court of another state would be a more appropriate forum. In deciding whether a forum is inconvenient, the court must consider the best interest ofthe child, and in achieving that result, the court may consider: if any other state is or recently became the home state of the child; if another state has a closer connection with the child; or if substantial evidence concerning the child is more readily available in another state. concerning the child's schooling is located in Maryland, Mother maintains that this Court should 22. Because Maryland is now the home state ofthe child, and all evidence defer jurisdiction and allow Maryland to adjudicate the claim. 95348( e) of the UCCJA, this Court can stay the Pennsylvania proceedings on condition that a 23. Because there is not currently an action pending in Maryland, under custody proceeding be promptly commenced in Maryland for proper adjudication of this issue. WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests the Court issue an order finding Pennsylvania to be an inconvenient forum under 95348 of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act and stay the Pennsylvania proceeding to allow the parties to initiate an action in Maryland. R ectfully submitted, q ~ cr/S (r- t Donald T. Kissinger, Esq HOWETT, KISSINGER & CONLEY, P.C. 130 Walnut Street /P.O. Box 810 Harrisburg, P A 17108 Telephone: (717) 234-2616 Counsel for Defendant, Stephanie S. Love ~ Date: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ALAN E. LOVE, Plaintiff v. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NO. 01-765 CIVIL TERM STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant CNIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY NISIT AnON PRAECIPE TO THE OFFICE OF PROTHONOTARY: Kindly incorporate the attached verification to Defend!mt's Response and New Matter to Plaintiffs Petition Requesting Custody Conciliation Conferellt~e, which response was filed September 27,2004. The filed response inadvertently failed to attach the enclosed verification. Date:~~/)dCCY+ Respe:fu5~litted, ~~~ Donald T. Kissinger, Esquire HOWETT, KISSINGER & CONLEY, P.C. 130 Walnut Street P.O. Box 810 Harrisburg, P A 17108 Telephone: (717) 234-2616 Counsel for Defendant, Stephanie S. Love VERIFICATION I, Stephanie S. Love, hereby swear and affirm that the facts contained in the foregoing Defendant's Response and New Matter to Plnin~iff'R PA~;ri~n Requestina are Custody Conciliation Conference true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief and are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. 94904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. J:J.;4Qr\~Y1.LL fClv...( Stephanie S. Love Date: 9/24/04 (") C'- 1-, ( , f " -j ._, "" C;;:l = -L:- o .., ::-I Ffi :2J r- -o'-n ~,rJ cr:' ()("" t.~~~ ;'jrn <:' ,..~ :~:J .,'<: C) 1..-') -< f ...- ::;' -.l'" C:~ 0:> ALAN E. LOVE, Plaintiff v. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant IN CUSTODY NO. 01-765 PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANlT'S NEW MATTER AND NOW comes Plaintiff, Alan E. Love (hereinafter referred to as "Father"), by and through his attorneys, Tucker Arensberg, P.C., who responds to Defendant's (hereinafter referred to as "Mother") New Matter and states as follows: 11. No responsive pleading required. 12. The allegations set forth in paragraph 12 are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. 13. The allegations set forth in paragraph 13 are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. 14. The allegations set forth in paragraph 14 are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. 15. The allegations set forth in paragraph 15 are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. 16. The allegations set forth in paragraph 16 are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. 17. The allegations set forth in paragraph 17 are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. 18. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is ~Idmitted that Mother and Montana have resided in the State of Maryland since 2000. The remainder of the allegations set forth in paragraph 18 are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. 19. The allegations set forth in paragraph 19 are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. 20. The allegations set forth in paragraph 20 are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. 21. The allegations set forth in paragraph 21 are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. 22. Admitted in part and denied in part. It is admitted that Maryland is now Montana's home state. It is further denied that all of the evidem:e relevant to Montana's schooling is located in Maryland. Further, it is averred that the issue at l1and does not deal solely with the child's schooling, but that the actual schooling is only a peripheral issue. The main issue in this case involves whether the child should attend a religious based school or a public school. By way of further reply, it is averred as follows: (a) Father has consistently registE3red his objections to Montana attending the Jewish Community Center (hereinafter referred 1:0 as "JCC") for day care. Some examples of the objections are as follows: (i) On September 26, 2002, after having learned that Mother enrolled Montana in a preschool program at the JCC without consultation with Father, Father noted that the enrollment created concerns for him. In a letter dated September 26, 2002 (copy attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof), Father pointed out that the parties had always agreed that Montana would be raised with an understanding of both of their religions and further expressed his concern that the enrollment in the JCC would cause Montana to be indoctrinated into the Jewish faith without any opportunity to exposure to his religion. It is important to note that at that time, Father had minimal contact with Montana. Thereafter, at the custody conference held in October of 2002, Father again expmssed his concerns about the JCC but agreed that Montana could remain in the day care program based upon Mother's representation that there was only a minor component of religious instruction one day per week. Father's concerns are specifically noted in the Court Order date,d October 24, 2002 (see attached Exhibit "B") and the Court specifically noted that Father's agreement to continue the day care situation would be "without prejudice to any subsequent position taken by Father in opposition to enrollment of the child in a religious based school... ". (ii) When Mother once a!~ain enrolled Montana for the September, 2003 JCC day care program, Father again registered his objection to the use of the JCC. (See attached letter dated October 17, 2003 marked as Exhibit "C" and made a part hereof. ) (iii) By letter dated April 113, 2004 (copy attached hereto, marked as Exhibit "0" and made a part hereof), Father again r,e-emphasized his opposition to the JCC as a day care provider and noted that he was even more Bldamantly opposed to the JCC as a permanent school situation. In that letter, it was specifically noted that even though Mother had indicated that JCC was only a preschool setting, Father wantedl his opposition noted once again to avoid any impression that he will agree to the JCC as the school setting for Montana. (iv) In a letter dated June 2:3, 2004 (copy attached hereto, marked as Exhibit "E" and made a part hereof), Father noted specifically that he did not want Montana returned to the JCC in the fall. His concern in this regard was that it was his understanding that as the children got older the amount of religious education increased. It was noted that he had consistently maintained that he did not want Montana to have any religious education in excess of what had been noted when this issue was originally raised. Further, he offered to go with Mother to investigate other day cares. (v) In a letter dated July 1B, 2004 (copy attached hereto, marked as Exhibit "F" and made a part hereof), the issue was specifically reiterated that Father did not want Montana to be enrolled in the JCC for the term beginning September, 2004. (b) No written responses were received to the letters of October 17, 2003, April 16, 2004, June 23, 2004 or July 19, 2004. However, following the July, 2004 letter, Defendant's counsel verbally advised Plaintiffs counsel's assist~mt that Defendant had intended to speak with Plaintiff directly on the issue of Montana's schooling. No such direct contact was made to Plaintiff by Defendant on said issue. (c) Therefore, a Petition Requesting Custody Conciliation was filed with the Court by Father on August 24, 2004. (d) A date for a custody conference was set for September 28, 2004 at 10:00 a.m. before Dawn S. Sunday, Custody Conciliator. (e) This matter was continued due at Mother's request due to her unavailability and the matter has not been reset apparently due to the New Matter filed by Mother. (f) The issue involved in this case is not the quality of the school attended by Montana. Rather, the issue at hand is whether Montana should attend a religious based school or a public school. As indicated in the Court's Order of October 24, 2002, that issue has been an issue since the inception of this case. The matter has been discussed at custody conferences and as noted above has been repeatedly raised in correspondence generated by Father's attorney. Only the Pennsylvania Court and the Pennsylvania attorneys are familiar with this aspect of the case and therefore the case should remain in Ilhe Courts in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 23. The allegations set forth in paragraph 23 are conclusions of law to which no responsive pleading is required. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court to deny Defendant's request and to retain jurisdiction over this case. LA<~~~< "Sandra L. Meilton, Esq Ire TUCKER ARENSIBERG, P.C. 111 North Front Sllreet P.O. Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 1i'108-0889 (717) 234-4121 ATTORNEYS FOH PLAINTIFF 72422.1 VERIFICATION I, the undersigned, Alan E. Love, acknowled!~e that the facts stated in the foregoing document are true and correct to the best of my knowledg . f mation a d belief. I understand that any false statements herein 18 Pa. C.SA Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to uthori 'es. ct to th penalties of Dated: {t-{S -o{ \ ~ TUCKER.ARENSBERC'SWAR.TZ ,. ...~.. f;;~( /.i#' /;~,r. .....) ~:;_(-' i,;' '.',":" .' ,,- F'rlE COPY CELEBRATtNG A CENTU"Y OF SE"VICE Sandra L Meilton smeilton@tuckerlaw.com September 26,2002 Donald T. Kissinger, Esquire P.O. Box 810 Harrisburg, PA 17108 RE: Love Dear Don: While Montana was with Alan this weekend shta fell and cut her head. Alan immediately took her to the emergency room at Holy Spirit Hospital and a plastic surgeon put three stitches in the wound. Apparently the cut was above the hairline and the plastic surgeon felt that there would be no residual scarring. Since Stephanie was not available when Alan returned Montana on Sunday, he filled her father in on the incident. It is my understanding that he also spoke with Stephanie earlier this week and there did not seem to be any problem about Montana's injury. However, I telephoned you and am following up with this letter just to give you a "heads up" on the incident. This incident brought to life the fact that we have on a number of occasions asked for Montana's medical records and have not as yet been provided with copies. Alan was embarrassed by the fact that he was asked a lot of questions to which he did not have the answers. If Stephanie had provided the medical records, he would have been better able to answer the questions and assure that the doctor treating Montana knew everything he needed to know about her medical history. Please have Stephanie provide copies of the medical records immediately so that this situation does not occur again. Finally, Alan learned in his conversation with Stephanie that she has enrolled Montana in a preschool program at the Jewish Community Center. She did this without consultation with Alan and the enrollment creates conoarns for Alan. Both parents had agreed that Montana would be raised with an understanding of both of their religions and Alan is concerned that Montana will be indoctrinated into the Jewish faith without any opportunity for exposure to his religion. I know we have a custody conference coming up in a few weeks and we can certainly discuss the issue at that time. In the interim, I would appreciate it if you would review this with Stephanie and provide me with information regarding the program in which Montana is enrolled. Since the parties have shared legal, Stephanie should have at least discussed this with Alan before enrolling Montana. 111 NO~TH FRONT STREET PO BOX 889 HARRISBURG, PA 17108.0889 7'7-,~34-.4121 800-257-4121 FAX 717-232-6802 PittSburgh . Pittsburgh Airport Area . Lewistown E-mail: tapc@tuckerlaw.com Exhibit 11A,'fww.tuckerlaw.com 1 JCKER. ARENSBER.C .SWAR. TZ ~" y..' ,.,,:..,,; >, . .... . CELEBRATING A CENTUR.Y OF SER.VICE I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, TUCKER ARENSBERG & SWARTZ xlwc.:tu1/J:f~ Sandra L. Meilton SLM/smk cc: Mr. Alan Love P.S. We already talked about all of these points but I am forwarding the letter for your file. P.S.S. Please bring Montana's medical records to the Custody Conference along with a copy of any billing from the doctor for any copying expense Stephanie may have incurred. 53185.1 111 NORTH FRONT STREET PO BOX 889 HARRISBURG, PA 17108-0889 717-2~W-4121 800.257-4121 FAX 717-232-6802 Pinsburgh . Pittsburgh Airport Area '. Lewistown E-mail: lapc@tuckerlaw.com www.tuckerlaw.com PCT 2.3 2002 OCT 2 (. 2lliJZ ALAN E. LOVE, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. 01-765 CIVIL ACTION LAW STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this .2. '1'2:: day of CD CX,..l~ , 2002, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows: 1. The Prior Order of this Court dated September 10, 2001 is vacated and replaced with this Order. 2. The parties shall participate in joint counseling with a professional selected by agreement. The purpose of the counseling shall be to improve commUIlication and establish a cooperative parenting relationship between the parties. The parties shall attend a minimum of 5 joint sessions with the counselor and shall equally share all costs of counseling which are not covered by insurance. The parties shall follow the recommendations of the counselor with respect to the duration and frequency of the counseling sessions. 3. The Father, Alan E. Love, and the Mother, Stephanie S. Love, shall have shared legal custody of Montana Erin Love, born December 30, 1999. Each parent shall have an equal right, to be exercised jointly with the other parent, to make all major non-emergency decisions affecting the Child's general well-being including, but not limited to, all decisions regarding her health, education and religion. Pursuant to the terms of this paragraph each parent shall be entitled to all records and information pertaining to the Child including, but not limited to, school and medical records and information. The Father's agreement that the Child may continue in her current day care program at the Jewish Community Center which includes a minor component of religious instruction one day per week shall be without prejudice to any subsequent position taken by the Father in opposition to emollment of the Child in a religious based school in the future. 4. The Mother shall have primary physical custody of the: Child. 5. The Father shall have partial physical custody of the Child on alternating weekends from Friday at 4:00 p.m. through Sunday at 4:00 p.m., beginning on Friday, October 11, 2002. In addition, the Father shall be entitled to have custody of the Child on a weekday between the Father's weekends Exhibit "B" from 3:00 p.m. until 7:00 p.m., upon providing notice to the Mother by 7:00 p.m. on the evening before the day on which the Father intends to exercise his period of custody. The Father's periods of weekday evening custody shall not be scheduled on Fridays immediately preceding the Mother's weekend period of custody. 6. The parties shall share or alternate having custody ofth~ Child on holidays as follows: A. THANKSGIVING: The Thanksgiving period of holiday custody shall run from the Wednesday before Thanksgiving at 4:00 p.m. through the Sunday following Thanksgiving at 4:00 p.m. The Mother shall have custody of the Child over Thanksgiving in even numbered years and the Father shall have custody in odd numbered years. B. CHRISTMAS: In even numbered years, the Father shall have custody of the Child from Christmas Eve at 12:00 noon through January 1 at 4:00 p.m. In odd numbered years, the Father shall have custody of the Child. from Christmas Eve at 12:00 noon through December 29 at 4:00 p.m. In 2002, th~: alternating weekend schedule shall resume with the Father having custody on Friday, January 10. In the event Hanukah falls during the Christmas holiday period of custody, the parties shall make an adjustment to the schedule so that the Mother has custody of the Child on Hanukah. In the event Hanukah and Christmas fall on the same day, the parties shall share the holiday as arranged by agreement. C. ROSH HASHANAH.YOM KIPPUR..PASSOVER.. HANUKAH: The Mother shall have custody of the Child for Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Passover and Hanukah each year from the night before the holiday at 3:00 p.m. through the day following the holiday at 12:00 noon. D. EASTER: The Father shall have custody of the Child over the Easter holiday each year from the Thursday before Easter at 4:00 p.m. through Easter Sunday at 4:00 p.m. Due to Passover in 2003, the Father's Easter holiday period of custody shall begin on Friday at 10:00 a.m. In the event that Passover falls during the Father's Easter period of holiday custody in the future, the parties shall make an adjustment to the schedule so that the Mother has custody on Passover. In the event Passover and Easter fall on the same day, the parties shall share the holiday as arranged by agreement. E. MEMORIAL DAY. JULY 4TH. LABOR DAY: The Memorial Day and Labor Day holiday periods of custody shall run from Saturday at 12:00 noon through Monday at 6:00 p.m. and the July 4th holiday shall run from July 3rd at 7:00 p.m. through July 5th at 7:00 p.m. In odd numbered years, the Mother shall have custody of the Child over Memorial Day and Labor Day and the Father shall have custody over the July 4th holiday. In even numbered years, the Father shall have custody of the Child for Memorial Day and Labor Day and the Mother shall have custody during the July 4th holiday. F. MOTHER'S DAY/FATHER'S DAY: The Mother shall have custody of the Child every year on Mother's Day and the Father shall have custody of the Child every year on Father's Day from Friday at 4:00 p.m. through Sunday at 4:00 p.m. G. The holiday custody schedule shall supersede and take precedence over the regular custody schedule. 7. Each party shall be entitled to have custody of the Child for 2 non-consecutive weeks each summer upon providing at least 60 days advance notice to the oHler party. The party providing notice first shall be entitled to have preference on the selection of his or her vacation dates. The vacation periods of custody under this provision shall be no more than 7 days in duration and shall be scheduled to include the party's regular weekend period of custody. 8. The non-custodial parent shall be entitled to have telephone contact with the Child 1 time per day. 9. The party receiving custody shall be responsible to provide transportation for the exchange of custody. All exchanges of custody shall take place at the parties' residences unless agreed otherwise. 10. Neither party shall do or say anything which may estrange the Child from the other parent, injure the opinion of the Child as to the other parent, or hamper the free and natural development of the Child's love and respect for the other parent. Both parties shall (:llsure that third parties having contact with the Child comply with this provision. 11. This Order is entered pursuant to an agreement of the parties at a Custody Conciliation Conference. The parties may modify the provisions of this Order by mutual consent. In the absence of mutual consent, the terms of this Order shall control. BY THE COURT, i.Lq Lu~ 0 D,~, q_ flWesley Oler, ., J. cc: Sandra 1. Meilton, Esquire - Counsel for Father Donald T. Kissinger, Esquire - Counsel for Mother 1"..'~~ 1~ "":.,!"'\~V r,:p\f'\",'(!' !;1~C'^""O ~ ~ t'-,-'.'"".. \-"-'~}';' ~ ~ ."". ",r'~ t"t.,... ...,,'\JFt I":, my h2M "'i~~.;'~1!t~; Protnollotar i ALAN E. LOVE, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. 01-765 CIVIL ACTION LAW STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant 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: 1. The pertinent information concerning the Child who is the subject of this litigation is as follows: NAME DATE OF BIRTH CURJRENTL Y IN CUSTODY OF Montana Erin Love December 30,1999 Mother 2. A Conciliation Conference was held on October 10, 2002, with the following individuals in attendance: The Father, Alan E. Love, with his counsel, Sandra 1. Meilton, Esquire and the Mother, Stephanie S. Love, with her counsel, Donald T. Kissinger, Esquire. 3. The parties agreed to entry of an Order ~ the form as attached. 0( k"1u /7 I) +ca.:.- c.( f:.. ~'!::l ' Dawn S. Sunday, Esquir Custody Conciliator - Date .~ .. rl r [:~' TUCKERIARE~~~W~~ Sandra L. Meilton sme'llton@tuckerlaw.com October 17, 2003 Donald T. Kissinger, Esquire P.O. Box 810 Harrisburg, PA 17108 RE: Love Dear Don: Alan Love continues to be concerned about the fact that Stephanie wants to use the JCC as Montana's daycare facility. From your correspondence, I gather that Stephanie believes that the JCC far exceeds the quality of any other daycare facility in her area. Alan wants to investigate this and in doing so, he would like to go to the JCC to obselVe classes and get a tour of the facility. Therefore, I would appreciate it if you would provide me with the address of the JCC facility and the name of a contact person that Alan cCiuld deal with. Please provide me with the information as soon as possible St3 that we can perhaps have some information before our Custody Conference. Sincerely, TUCKER ARENS BERG, P.C. ~~ Sandra L. Meilton SLM/smk cc: Mr. Alan Love 63356.1 Exhibit "e" Tucker Arensberg, P.C. 111 North Front Street P.O. Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 17108 www.tuckerlaw.com p.600.257,4121 p.717.234,4121 f. 717.232.6802 . Tu6<ER\ARE~~~?"l~~ Sandra L Meilton smeilton@tuckerlaw.com April 16, 2004 VIA FACSIMILE - 234-5402 Donald T. Kissinger, Esquire P.O. Box 810 Harrisburg, PA 17108 RE: Love Dear Don: I am beginning to get concerned that we may never be able to connect by telephone and, therefore, I decided to resort to the fax! Hopefully, we will have spoken before you receive this. However, if we have not, I would ask that you give me a call so we can try to resolve some of the outstanding issues in the Love case. Support _ The support numbers as calculated by Frank Goshorn are acceptable to Alan - e.g. $1,262.00 per month for child support and $38.00 per month spousal support. However, we believe that the Order should be unallocated and be entirely deductible to Alan. If the Order is to remain allocated, then the tax consequences of the unallocated Order must be taken into account According to my calculation, the allocated Order penalizes Alan by approximately $6,200.00. His Order should, if we retain the allocation, be reduced by approximately $515.00 per month. At one point, we discussed the possibility that Stephanie consider withdrawing her request for spousal support thereby eliminating the $38.00 payment. If she is willing to withdraw her spousal support request, we would agree, to an Order of $1 ,262.00 for child support. If Stephanie is willing to withdraw the spousal support claim, we would have to recalculate the arrearage and I believe that we should calculate it based upon Alan's actual income for 2003. Frank made the Order effective January 23, 2004. He did not take into consideration the fact that Alan had no income during the month of January. . Therefore , I believe that Alan should be entitled to some credit for the arrearage that accuJJ:\ulated during that three week period. I believe if we can resolve the issue of allpCation/spousal support, you and I should be able to work out the arrearage issue. On another matter pertaining to support, Alan received a raise effective, I believe, April 1 ,2004. His salary is now$82,000.00 as opposed to the $78,000.00 used to calculate his support obligation. This will result in a snght increase in his Support Order and again, I believe you and I can run those numbers. When we do the calculations, I still want to reserve the reduction that Frank gave to Alan to help offset some of his extraordinary expenses. Again, when we speak, I am sure we can work out those numbers. Exhibit "D" Tucker Arensberg, P.C. 111 North Front Street P.O. Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 17108 www.tuckerlaw.com p.800.257.4121 p.717.234.4121 f.717..232.6802 TUCKERIAREN,,~~fl3-~ Divorce _ You and I had discussed a potential settlement of the economic issues surrounding the parties' divorce. We discussed the possibility of Stephanie waiving alimony and Alan waiving his right to her 401 (k). Noting that Alan believes that the 401 (k) has grown significantly in the last couple of months, he is willing to agree to waive his right to the growth in Stephanie's 401 (k) in return for her waiver of alimony. The other two issues which we discussed - Alan maintaining Montana as beneficiary on a portion of the life insurance held by his parents and payment of the arrearages in a lump sum are not possible for Alan. With regard to the life insurance, he emphasized that he is not the owner of the policy and that he has NOT madl3 premium payments since the parties' separation; that he could not afford to make the payments following separation and can not currently afford to do so. His parents are the owners of the policy and he has no control of the beneficiary designation. With regard to a lump sum repayment of the arrearages, Alan simply is not in a position to do that at this point in time nor is he able to borrow the money to do so. As you are aware, he is still paying on the bankruptcy and that payment coupled with legal fees and support, pretty much exhaust his monthly budget. Alan would like to move forward and finalize the divorCE! and I would appreciate it if you would review Alan's position with Stephanie and see if we can bring this matter to a close. Custodv - In the very near future, Alan's work schedule is going to be shifted so that he works nine nine-hour days and has every other Friday off. Therefore, he would like to extend his custodial period with Montana to begin at 10:00 a.m. on Friday. Please review his request with Stephanie and see if this is acceptable. Alan did want me to reemphasize that he is still opposE,d to the Jewish Community Center as a daycare provider and he is even more adamantly opposed to the JCC as a permanent school situation. I reminded him that Stephanie had previously indicated that this was only a preschool setting but he wanted his opposition noted again to avoid any impression that he will agree to the JCC as a school sE!tting for Montana. After you have had an opportunity to review these matters, please give me a call. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, TUCKER ARENSBERG, P.C. ~~ Sandra L. Mellton SLM/smk cc: Mr. Alan Love . . TUCKER\~~~f~~ Sandra L. Meilton smeilton@tuckerlaw.com Fll E COpy June 23, 2004 Donald T. Kissinger, Esquire P.O. Box 810 . Harrisburg, PA 17108 RE: Love Dear Don: Alan checked further into the overtime situation as it appears on his paystub and has learned that he really does not get overtime. His paystub appears to have overtime on it but that is only because Alan works nine, nine hour days in a two week period. Alan tried. to explain this to me but I was not sure that I followed the explanation. We will monitor the paystubs over the next few weeks and see what happens. On another matter, Alan has advised me that he does not want Montana returned to the Jewish Community Center in the fall. It is his understanding that as the , children get older, the amount of religious education increases. He has consistently maintained that he does not want Montana to have. any religious education in excess of what she had already been getting. He has investigated other daycares and has provided me with a numbe!r of potential facilities. Alan indicated that three of the facilities are close to Stephanie's home while the fourth is close to her place of employment. Alan has indicated that he is more than willing to go with Stephanie to personally interview the personnel of the various establishments so that they can select an appropriate facility. Please let me know Stephanie's position so that I can advise Alan how to proceed. Finally, Montana has mentioned on a number of occasions that she has gone on field trips with her class and excursions outside thl, school. Alan would like to have a schedule of these trips so that, if possible, he can arrange to chaperone some of the field trips. Please give me a call so that we can discuss thesl~ issues. Tucker Arensberg, PC. 111 North Front Street P.O. Box 889 HarrislJurg, PA 17108 www.tuckerlaw.com p.800.257.4121 p.717.234.4121 f.717.:132.6802 Exhibit "E" ':i/. . 1 . TUCKER\ARE~~~f~~ . I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, TUCKER ARENSBERG, P.C. ~~ Sandra L. Meilton SLM/smk Enclosure cc: Mr. Alan E. Love 69683.1 ~ . / TUCKER\ARE~~~fn~~ Sandra L. Meilton smeilton@tuckerlaw.com (sent via fax to 234-5402) ff/LE CO,Y July 19, 2004 Donald T. Kissinger, Esquire P.O. Box 810 Harrisburg, PA 17108 RE: Love v. Love Dear Don: Stephanie Love has called our office on two occasions, but, as I indicated to you when we spoke in Florida, Alan has indicated that he does not want us dealing directly with Stephanie. May I please hear from you by July 29, 2004 in connection with the above matter on the following issues and provide me with Stepl1anie's responses: 1. Alan's request to switch his weekend with Montana from August 6, 7 and 8 to either July 30 and 31 and August 1 or the weekend of August 27-29 since he is out of town for the August 6-9 weekend on business. This matter was noted in our letter to you dated June 25 and Alan's letter to Stephanie dated June 21, 2004. 2. School for Montana. See our letter to you dated Jun,e 23, 2004. Please note, in particular, that Alan is requesting that he be involved in the selection of the school for the upcoming year and that Montana not be enrolled in the JCC. 3. You and I spoke regarding Alan's concern about taking Montana to Canada in August and his request to have Stephanie sign a letter, as her mother, acknowledging her consent to allow him to take her on vacation out of the United States. If we do not hear from you by said date on these issues, Alan has requested us to file a Petition with the Court. Sincerely, TUCKER ARENSBERG, P.C. ~~ Sandra L. Meilton SLM:gmr cc: Mr. Alan Love (via email) 70336.1 Tucker Arensberg, P.C. 111 North Front Street P.O. Box 889 Harrisburg, PA 17108 www.tuckerlaw.com p.800.257.4121 p.717.234.4121 f.717.232.6802 Exhibit "F" CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ~ AND NOW, this I ~ day of October, 2004, I, Gloria M. Rine, Paralegal, for the firm of Tucker Arensberg, P.C., hereby certify that I have this day served a copy of the within document, by mailing same by first class mail, addressed as follows: Donald T. Kissinger, Esquire P.O. Box 810 Harrisburg, PA 17108 I 1c ~~1~'1~ Gloria 11II. Rine IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLV ANlA ALAN E. LOVE, Plaintiff v. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NO. 01-765 CIVIL TERM STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant CIVIL ACllION - LAW IN CUSTODYNISITATION STIPULATION FOR AGREED UPON CUSTODY ORDER THIS STIPULATION is made this 0/ +:ay of 4-&1)' uS +. ,2005, by and between STEPHANIE S. LOVE (hereinafter "Mother"), of Maryland, and ALAN E. LOVE (hereinafter "Father"), ofCwnberland County, Pennsylvania; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the parties hereto are husband and wife, ha.ving been lawfully married on July 10, 1993 but who currently live separate and apart; WHEREAS, one child was born of the marriage between the parties, namely, Montana E. Love, born December 30,1999; WHEREAS, custody of Montana is currently governed by an Order of Court dated October 24, 2002 entered by the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County; WHEREAS, Mother and the child relocated to Maryland in 2000; WHEREAS, simultaneously herewith, the parties entered into a Marital Settlement Agreement that fully and finally resolved all personal and property rights and obligations as between each other and which dealt generally with the issue of child custody; WHEREAS, the parties hereto are desirous of modifying the custody order dated October 24, 2002 by entering into this Stipulated Custody Order that specifically settles the issue of legal and physical custody of their child at this time without the necessity of court intervention; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration ofthese premisl~s and of the mutual promises covenants and undertakings hereinafter set forth, Mother and Father, each intending to be legally bound hereby, covenant and agree as follows: 1. Lel!al Custody. The parties shall continue to share legal custody of their child, legal custody being defined as the right to make major decisions affecting the best interests of the child, including, but not limited to, medical, religious and educational decisions. The parties agree to discuss and consult with one another with a view towards adopting a harmonious policy calculated to promote the child's best interests. Each party shall have the right to be kept informed of the child's educational, social, moral and medical development. Each party shall be entitled to full and complete records and information concerning the child from any doctor, dentist, teacher, treatment institution or similar authority and to have copies, reports, notices or other communications given to either parent. Each parent shall notify the other of any matter relating to the child which could reasonably be expected to be of significant concern to the other. Day-to-day decisions shall be the responsibility of the parent then having physical custody. The parent having physical custody of the child at the time of any emergency shall have the right to make any immediate decisions necessitated thereby but shall infc)rm the other parent of the emergency and consult with him or her as soon as possible. The parties agree that Mother shall 2 provide Father with copies ofthe child's school work and any correspondence from the school to the parents within one week from receipt of same. After the child changes school at the end of the 2005-2006 academic year, which change is addressed herein, Father shall be responsible for attempting to establish the direct release of information from the: school itself. If school policy prevents such direct release and/or communication, then Mother shall continue to provide copies of the child's school work and any correspondence from the school to the parents. Each party agrees to provide the other with notice of all ofthe child's extracurricular activities, school or otherwise, within twenty-four (24) hours ofleaming of such events. 2. Phvsical Custody. The parties agree that Mother shall remain the primary physical custodian of the child subject to those periods of partial custody by Father in accordance with the following: (a) On alternating weekends fi'om Friday at 10:00 until Sunday at 4:00 p.m. Once the child starts kindergarten, Father's alternating weekends shall start at 4:00 p.m. on Fridays; and (b) On a weekday between Father's weekends from 3:30 p.m. until 7:00 p.m. upon providing notice to Mother by 7:00 p.m. on the evening before the day on which Father intends to exercise his period of custody. Father's periods of weekday evening custody shall not be scheduled on Fridays immediately preceding Mother's weekend period of custody. 3 3. Holidavs. The parties shall alternate the following holidays, which shall take precedence over the regular schedule: (a) (b) (c) Labor Day. The Memorial Day and Labor Day holidays shall commence on the Saturday before the holiday at 12:00 Noon and continue through the day of the holiday at 6:00 p.m. The July 4th holiday shall commence on July 3'" at 7:00 p.m. and shall continue through July 5th at 7:00 p.m. In all odd- numbered years, Mother shall have custody of the child over the Memorial Day and Labor Day holidays, and Father shall have custody over the Fourth of July holiday. In all even-numbered years, Father shall custody of the child for the Memorial Day and Labor Day holidays, and Mother shall have custody of the child during the Fourth of July holiday. Memorial Day; Fourth of July; and 4. Mother's Day/Father's Dav. The parties agree that Mother shall have custody of the child each and every Mother's Day from the Friday prior to the holiday at 4:00 p.m. through the day of the holiday at 4:00 p.m., and Father shall have custody of the child each and every Father's Day from the Friday prior to the holiday at 4:00 p.m. through the day of the holiday at 4:00 p.m. This schedule shall take precedence over the regular schedule. 4 5. Easter. Father shall have custody of the child over the Easter holiday each year from Holy Thursday at 4:00 p.m. through Easter Sunday at 4:00 p.m., which holiday shall take precedence over the regular schedule. In the event that Passover (which holiday is discussed infra), falls during Father's Easter holiday, the parties shall make an adjustment to the schedule so that Mother has custody of the child on Passover. In the event Passover and Easter fall on the same day, the parties shall share the holiday by mutual agreement. 6. Thanksl!ivinl:. The parties shall alternate the Thanksgiving holiday, which shall be defined as commencing the Wednesday before Thanksgiving at 4:00 p.m. and concluding the Sunday following Thanksgiving at 4:00 p.m. The Thanksgiving holiday shall take precedence over the regular schedule, and in all even-numbered years Mother shall have custody of the child over Thanksgiving, and in all odd-numbered years Father shall have custody of the child over Thanksgiving. 7. Jewish Holidavs. The parties agree that Mother shall have custody of the child for all Jewish holidays each year, which holiday schedule shall take precedence over the regular schedule. Each Jewish holiday shall commence the night before the holiday at 3:00 p.m. and shall continue through the day following the holiday at 12:00 Noon. 8. Christmas. The parties agree that, in even-numbered years, Father shall have custody of the child from Christmas Eve at 12:00 Noon through January 1" at 4:00 p.m. In odd-numbered years, Father shall have custody of the child from Christmas Eve at 12:00 Noon through December 29th at 4:00 p.m. The Christmas schedule shall take precedence over the regular schedule. In the event Hanukah falls during the Christmas holiday, the parties shall make 5 an adjustment to the schedule so that Mother has custody of the child on Hanukah. In the event Hanukah and Christmas fall on the same day, the parties shall share the holiday by mutual agreement. 9. Summer Vacation. Each party shall be entitled to have custody of the child for two non-consecutive weeks (i.e., seven continuous days for each week) each summer upon providing at least sixty (60) days advance notice to the other party. The party providing notice first shall be entitled to have preference on the selection of his or her vacation dates. The vacation periods of custody under this provision shall be schedukd so as to be no more than seven (7) days in duration and shall encompass each party's regular weekend period of custody. 10. Child's Schoolinl!. Commencing with th(: 2006-2007 academic year, the child shall either be enrolled in a public school or a private school. If Mother seeks to place the child in a private school, then Father will have the absolute right to visit the school in advance of any decisions being made and will have the right to approve the school prior the child being enrolled. The parties will then make an appropriate decision pursuant to applicable legal criteria as to the school selected. If Mother makes a determination to use: a private school, then the parties agree she shall be solely responsible for the expense incident to the private schooling. Father agrees that the child shall continue to attend the Jewish Community Center for the 2005-2006 academic year (through Kindergarten). 6 11. Child's Activities. Each party shall ensur,e the child participates in all regularly scheduled activities during their periods of custody. Each party shall provide the other with notice of all extracurricular activities within twenty-four (24) hours of learning of such events. 12. Traosoortatioo. Absent agreement betw(:en the parties, the party receiving custody shall be responsible to provide transportation fbr the exchange of custody. All custody exchanges shall take place at the parties' respective residences unless the parties agree otherwise. 13. Disparaeiol!: Remarks Prohibited. The parties shall refrain from making any disparaging or negative remarks with regard to the other either directly to the child or in the presence of the child. Likewise, the parties shall ensure that thirdl parties refrain from making any disparaging or negative remarks with regard to the other party either directly to the child or in the presence of the child. Neither party shall do or say anything which may estrange the child from the other parent, injure the opinion of the child as to the other parent, or hamper the free and natural development of the child's love and respect for the other parent. The parties agree that each shall refrain from discussing proposed changes to the custodial schedule and/or any other matters relative to the health or well being of the child during custody exchanges and in front of the child. 7 14. Alcohol/Controlled Substances. During any periods of custody, the parties shall not possess or use any controlled substances, and neither party shall consume alcoholic beverages to the point of intoxication. The parties shan likewise ensure, to the extent possible, that other household members or guests comply with this prohibition. 15. Telenhone/Address. Each party shall keep the other apprised of his or her telephone number and address. The parties agree to report to the other any changes in address and telephone numbers within twenty-four (24) hours of the date of such change. Each party shall be entitled to reasonable telephone privileges with the child, at least one call per day, while the child is in the custody or control ofthe party. 16. Notification. If either parent takes the child on vacation or will be away overnight with the child for two consecutive days or longer, the parent having custody shall provide notice to the other parent as to the location of the child and a number where the child can be reached. Said notice shall also contain flight information, if applicable, and hotel name, address and telephone number. Notice shall be given at least one (1) week prior to the scheduled departure. 17. Miscellaneous. Mother and Father agree to promptly commence co- parenting counseling with Janet Bliss for a minimum of three (3) sessions, the cost of which shall be borne solely by Father. Father agrees that the terms and provisions of this Stipulation shall be entered as an order of court with the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County and that thereafter jurisdiction shall be transferred to Maryland, with Maryland assuming jurisdiction over all future custody issues, including, but not limited to, modifications or enforcement of the instant order, or both. Mother may take the steps to transfer the order im:orporating this Stipulation with 8 the appropriate court in Maryland after the Court of Common Plf:as of Cumberland COUll enters , IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto set its order. date first written above. ~10,,z~ ~ WITNESS y-- ~)j, A' f WITNESS Jr, d~IWYUk-. 4- t(,u~ STEPIWtm~ S. LOVE 9 STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF ~~vfL\", ) ) BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared STEPHANIE S. LOVE, known to me to be the person who executed the foregoing instrument, and who acknowledged to me that she executed same for the purposes and considerations therein expressed. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE this tK day of u,( Ll ,2005. \ ~ I' _~ ) (!\;\ ~'--f ( . ~t1.AA M '~7 Notary Public in for l State of Pennsylvania Typed or printed name of Notary: i)~ r~ 1 / \ L t My~ \ 1 < LLu$d 7 My commission t~' GF 1'01lS'/lYA1M 1IOfAIUI. SEM. -lE"'"*IC lIlY OF IlMIlI llAUPllIII COlIIlI'f Ill' ISSIOII M'RIL 21 10 ~1~~VJY2~~I~ ~.!"J~lI'IIIOt'd JI(,l JAIliAWI 3fJgU'l rt'MOA1JJ2ll\l1 .1_ "1\;OJ jlU~HJ,\(l ,ilM!!92,iU1AH lO no IN!':; ,3\;' i:W~.l~!9X3 ~jGlZll!M"'9.:]" COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA ) ) COUNTY OF ) BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared ALAN E. LOVE, known to me to be the person who executed the foregoing instrument, and who acknowledged to me that he executed same for the purposes and considerations therein expressed. ,1 GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE !h;, ~ ohy of Ht1fW+ ,2005. ,/ Notary Public in and for Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Typed or printed name of Notary: 6/~/Uq #J, 7Z0c.- My commission expires: MOnW. 1M ~M." NoIarY NIID c::nvOFIIr IT ptI4.._.caIIV My c...I,d . .....- I,IClll7 11 .lA:lllJAllWOl1 MlIMAllIO.Jt' -... V>"'''~ "IIMUO") IoIfftIlot\O .0lllUII1IIIllIlH '10 fre tllO$.a..... Jetl(pt~ I"Iolto,,,,,,,,,,) yM " c. 2: -" -< ,..., c::::t c-., c.n ~ C::: C") o ." :i' rn1*! -om '''6 r') :-::1 ( '~.T.~ ::n ~~(~ om "--1 ?;; '< o " -'h" <.f! t',1.iy,i1"'( RECEIVED I.UG 1 J 1~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN CUSTODYNISITATION ALAN E. LOVE, Plaintiff NO. 01-765 CIVIL TERM STEPHANIE S. LOVE, Defendant ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this ~day of ~....0 ~ .,.1 ,2005, it is hereby ORDERED and DECREED that the terms and conditions ofthe attached Stipulation for Entry of Agreed Upon Custody Order are incorporated herein and hereby made an Orde:r of Court. BY THE COURT: u >: '2. ,-- n J"" '0<' ~r.:::' \.~-(~ ~J-\> erQ 0"- u..tQ.. EeUJ ~ '6 i:::> <:'"1 i!> :;C. 0- C'I - ;::; ~ ~4 :~-~.:t C!, -:> :;a: 'iZ ~ "~, ::-,') .',~ ~:.>'- "<'l'~~~ :,:'j(TI .:';)0_ '~";' :; o -