The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05-3109 NELSON L. RITCHIE, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : CIVIL ACTION - LAW ; 05'- :)109 CiutL y~ : IN CUSTODY \ CRYSTAL D. TOLLEFSEN Defendant COMPLAINT FOR CUSTODY AND NOW comes Plaintiff, Nelson 1. Ritchie, by and through his counsel, Mark A. Mateya, Esquire, and in support of his Complaint for Custody avers the following: I. Plaintiff is Nelson 1. Ritchie, an adult individual presently residing at 315 Walnut Street, Boiling Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17007. 2. Defendant is Crystal D. Tollefsen, an adult individual presently residing at 6755 Leigh Road, Rocky Mount, North Carolina 27803. 3. The parties herein are the parents of the following children: Dakota Ann Ritchie 6755 Leigh Road Rocky Mount, NC 27803 DOB: 6/24/92 Age: 12 years 4. The parties herein entered into a Property Settlement Agreement on or about September 18, 1997, which included in pertinent part a provision for the custody of Dakota Ann Ritchie. A copy of the Property Settlement Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and is incorporated herein by reference. 5. The Property Settlement Agreement was incorporated into a Decree in Divorce to Action No, 97-20554 in Lebanon County, Pennsylvania. 6. During the past five years, the child has resided with the following individuals at the following locations: 103 A West Main Street Aberdeen, NC 28315 With Crystal and David Tolefsen (Step-father) 1229 Possum Trot Lane Rocky Mount, NC 27804 With Crystal and David Tolefsen and Hannah Tolefsen 6755 Leigh Road Rocky Mount, NC 27803 With Crystal and David Tolefsen and Hanna Tolefsen 7. Custody of the child should be shared in the manner requested because: a. Defendant has interfered with the relationship with Plaintiff; this interference has escalated in the recent past; b. Defendant has forbidden daughter to communicate with the Plaintiffvia e- mail, a form of communication which Plaintiff and daughter frequently shared until recently; c. Plaintiff avers that it is the daughter's interest in spending more time with Plaintiff that has prompted Defendant's actions regarding contact; d. Defendant has restricted telephone contact between the Plaintiff and daughter; e. Defendant has consistently relocated with daughter over the past several years in the North Carolina area, not permitting the daughter to have any consistency in her home life; f. Plaintiff has extended family in Pennsylvania who have a genuine interest in daughter's welfare and would be able to have a substantive effect on the daughter's upbringing; g. Defendant's extended family lives in central Pennsylvania and they also have a genuine interest in daughter's welfare and would be able to have a substantive effect on the daughter's upbringing; h. Daughter has shown interest in spending more time with Plaintiff. i, The present Custody Order in Lebanon County, Pennsylvania has not been followed for several years. WHEREFORE, upon consideration of the foregoing, it is respectfully requested that this Honorable Court appoint a Custody Conciliator and schedule a conciliation as soon as can practicably be scheduled. Respectfully submitted, ht~,~ AttomeyLD. No. 78931 P.O. Box 127 Boiling Springs, P A 17007 (717) 241-6500 (717) 241-3099 Fax Date: ~ lrJ DC; Counsel for Plaintiff VERIFICATION I, Nelson L Ritchie, verify that the facts set forth in the foregoing Petition for Modification of Custody and Petition for Appointment of Custody Conciliator are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, I understand that false statements herein are subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C,S. ~904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Nelson L Ritchie #u. ~~ DATED: S - j 0 - 0 ;; ~\l "iC. 0 r-' ~ -,:J "'" - ~; c? c.n \I:.. ......... 'e .-\ :-- :::l:::n :;"~ fT1 r-- -- V) - ~'~ ~ - C> 0" ' ) , Co f'. ':c,C 1:) lr1 ".~J, ~'. l-v ~ ~ r: ~:~r) () Cf! r~-)rn :~:J. C). x::- ;5 1- 0 ::..:::: - NELSON L. RITCHIE PLAINTIFF IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL V AN1A v. 05-3109 CIVIL ACTION LAW CRYSTAL D, TOLLEFSEN DEFENDANT IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, Thursday, June 23, 2005 , upon consideration of the attached Complaint, it is hereby directed that parties and their respective counsel appear before Jacqueline M. Verney, Esq. , the conciliator, at 4th Floor, Cumberland County Courthonse, Carlisle on Thursday, July 14,2005 at 8:30 AM for a Pre-Hearing Custody Conference. At such conference, an effort will be made to resolve the issues in dispute; or if this cannot be accomplished, to define and narrow the issues to be heard by the court, and to enter into a temporary order. 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 penn anent 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 hearine. FOR THE COURT. By: Isl facqueline M. Verney. Esq. Custody Conciliator y The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County is required by taw 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 A TTORNEY AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HA VE 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 Bcdford Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Telephone (717) 249-3166 -~ ~~ ~~~ 5'<7.Ee-'? - --;;fty:2 ~ ~ f"r;l,Ee<1 +vv ~ 'fl ~U/ ~ - P9 517, E'C',? 2S :8 f.!d SZ 11i1l' ~onz AtNICNOi'L:{fdd 3Hl .:f0 ::j:Ju:)(}~o:nt:f NELSON L. RITCHIE, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : CIVIL ACTION - LAW CRYSTAL D. TOLLEFSON, : NO. 05-3109 Defendant : IN CUSTODY PRARCIPR FOR l.TSTlNG CASR FOR ARGllMF.NT TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: Please list the within matter for the next Argument COllIt. 5. State matter to be argued: PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS 6. IdentifY counsel who will argue case: (b) for Defendant: Jason J. Schibinger, Esquire Address: Buzgon Davis Law Offices 525 South Eighth Street Lebanon, P A. 17042 (b) for Plaintiff: Address: Mark A. Mateya, Esquire P.O. Box 127 Boiling Springs, P A, 17007 7. I will notifY all parties in writing within two (2) days that this case has been listed for argument. 8. Argument Court Date: August 24, 2005 BUZGON DAVIS LAW OFFICES BY: " Dated: '1 \1 IA,o\ Jason J. Schibin Attorne . 86859 525 South Eighth Street-Post Office Box 49 Lebanon, P A 17042-0049 (717) 274-1421 Attorneys for Defendant, Crystal D. Tollefson ~ Q, ~ -::;\:..-0 '-" t<'~. 0- "'(1)'q ~~:;_ '~~ c:~t2~' . 'F cP '::~.t~.j" ":&\,-: .. --:::.. . ~ '6 ~( a ;,;;:? NELSON L. RITCHIE, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : CIVIL ACTION - LAW CRYSTAL D. TOLLEFSON, : 1'10.05-3109 Defendant : IN CUSTODY PRF.I .IMIN A RV OR.IF.C'Tl.QNS AND NOW, comes the Defendant, Crystal D. Tollefson, by and through her attorneys, Buzgon Davis Law Offices, and files the within Preliminary Objections, pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S.A. 5421, respectfully averring as follows: I. Plaintiff, Nelson L. Ritchie, hereinafter referred to as "Father", is an adult individual presently residing at 315 Walnut Street, Boiling Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17007. 2, Defendant, Crystal D. Tollefson, hereinafter referred to as "Mother", is and adult individual presently residing at 6755 Leigh Road, Rocky Mount, North Caroline 27803. 3, The parties are the parents of one minor child, Dakota Ann Ritchie, born June 24, 1992. 4. On or about September 18, 1997, the parties entered into a Property Settlement Agreement, which included terms of custody with regards to Dakota. A true and correct copy of the September 18, 1997 Property Settlement Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 5. Per part V, paragraphs 22 and 23, Mother was granted full physical and legal custody of Dakota, subject to Father's rights of partial physical custody at the following times: (1) one weekend per month, from Friday at 5:00 p.m. to Sunday at 6:00 p.m., (2) three weeks during Dakota's summer vacation, and (3) on various holidays. See Exhibit A, page 6, part V, paragraphs 22 and 23. 6. Mother has maintained primary physical custody of Dakota for the past eight (8) years. 7. From November, 1997 until October, 1999, Molher and Dakota resided in Houston, Texas. 8, Since October, 1999, Mother and Dakota have resided in North Carolina. 9, Mother and Dakota have resided at 6755 Leigh Road, Rocky Mount, North Carolina, 27803, since August, 2003. 10. Per paragraph 34 of the September 18, 1997 Property Settlement Agreement, the Agreement shall be construed under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, however, there is no requirement that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania be utilized for purposes of jurisdiction. 11. On or about June 16, 2005, Father filed a Complaint for Custody, apparently seeking changes to the current custody schedule, although Fath(~r is not specific in his Complaint for Custody. 12. Based upon the fact that the current custody arrangement is set forth in the September 18, 1997 Property Settlement Agreement, as agreed upon by the parties, this is presently before the Court for an initial determination, as the matter was not previously litigated. 13. Pursuant to 21 Pa r S A ~4?1: (a) [E]xcept as otherwise provided in section 5424 (relating to temporary emergency jurisdiction), a court of this Commonwealth has jurisdiction to make an initial child custody determination only if: (1) this Commonwealth is the home state of the child on the date of the commencement of the proceedings or was the home state of the child within six months before the commencement of the proceedings and the child is absent from this Commonwealth but a parent or person acting as a parent continues to reside in this Commonwealth; (2) a court of another state does not have jurisdiction under paragraph (1) or a court of the home state of the child has declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that this Commonwealth is the more appropriate forum under section 5427 (relating to inconvenient forum) or 5428 (relating to jurisdiction declined by reason of conduct) and: (i) the child and the child's parents, or the child and at least one parent or a person acting as a parent have a significant connection with this Commonwealth other than mere physical presence; and (ii) substantial evidence is available in this Commonwealth concerning the child's care, protection, training and personal relationships; (3) all courts having jurisdiction under paragraphs (I) or (2) have declined to exercise jurisdiction on the ground that a court of this Commonwealth is the more appropriate forum to determine the custody of the child under section 5427 or 5428; or (4) no court in any other state would have jurisdiction under the criteria specified in paragraph (1), (2) or (3). 14. North Carolina, not Pennsylvania, was clearly thtl home state of the child as of the date of the filing of Father's Complaint for Custody on June 16, 2005, and was the home state of the child within six months before the filing of Father's Complaint for Custody. 15. Further, Father does not allege facts in his Complaint for Custody to suggest that Pennsylvania should exercise temporary emergency jurisdiction under Section 5424. 16. North Carolina, which is the home state of the child, has not declined to exercise jurisdiction under S"ction 'i4?7, relating to inconvenient forum, or S"ction 'i47R, relating to jurisdiction declined by reason of conduct. 17. With regards to inconvenient forum, the majority of the witnesses and the bulk of the evidence regarding the child's care, protection, training, IDOldical treatment, education, and personal relationships, are in North Carolina, where the child resides for most of the year, and Pennsylvania would be an inconvenient forum due to the fact that the witnesses would be forced to travel from North Carolina for the hearing. 18. While Father alleges in his Complaint for Custody that there is evidence from his immediate family concerning the welfare of the child, there are certainly more significant contacts in the state of North Carolina, as well as evidence concerning the child's care, protection, training and personal relationships. 19. North Carolina is clearly the home state of the child, and based upon 11 P~ r SA 542l, and this Court should decline to exercise jurisdiction over lhis matter. 20. The home state of the child is the preferred basis for jurisdiction and predominates over other grounds for jurisdiction, and absent circumstances which would make the home state of the child an inappropriate forum for the child custody action, the matter should be litigated in the home state, ROllawin v Rouawin, 615 A.2d 786 (Pa,Super. 1992), and R1Rck v Rbck, 657 A,2d 964 (Pa.Super. 1995). 21. If this Court determines that the September 18, 1997 Property Settlement Agreement, which includes the parties' custody agreement, constitutes an initial child custody determination, this Court should still decline to exercise jurisdiction over this matter, pursuant to 23. Pa r S A ~4?? 22. Pursuant to ?1 P~ r S A ~4?2: (a) [E]xcept as otherwise provided in section 5424 (relating to temporary emergency jurisdiction), a court of this Commonwealth which has made a child custody determination consistent with section 5421 (relating to initial child custody jurisdiction) or 5423 (relating to jurisdiction to modifY determination) has exclusive, continuing jurisdiction over the determination until: (I) a court of this Commonwealth detemlines that neither the child, nor the child and one parent, nor the child and a person acting as a par,ent have significant connection with this Commonwealth and that substantial evidence is no long'~r available in this Commonwealth concerning the child's care, protection, training and personal relationships; or (b) Modification where the court does not have exclusive jurisdiction, continuing jurisdiction. - A court of this Commonwealth which has made: a child custody determination and does not have exclusive, continuing jurisdiction under this section may modifY that determination only if it has jurisdiction to make an initial determination under section 5421. 23. Although Father continues to exercise rights of partial physical custody with Dakota in Pennsylvania, it is clear that Dakota has attended school for several years on North Carolina, receives most of her medical treatment in North Carolina, and there is substantial evidence concerning the child's care, protection, training and personal relationships is in North Carolina, not Pennsylvania. 24. Additionally, although Father may have a significant connection with Pennsylvania, the child no longer has a significant connection with Pennsylvania, due to the fact that she has resided primarily outside of Pennsylvania for the past eight (8) years. 25, The Pennsylvania Superior Court recently held that Pennsylvania courts will not assume jurisdiction over a child custody case under the signifiicant contacts principle unless it appears that no other state can assume jurisdiction under statutory prerequisites substantially similar to Pennsylvania law. Md:oy v Thr".h, 862 A.2d 109 (Pa.Super. 2004). 26. As stated previously, North Carolina is the home state of the child in the instant matter, and the bulk of the evidence and witnesses concerning the child's care, protection, training and personal relationships is in North Carolina, and therefore, based upon the holding in Mcroy, this Court should not assume jurisdiction under the significant ,'ontacts principle, as alleged by Father. 27. With regards to 21 p~ C S A ~4?? (h), it is ckar that Pennsylvania does not have jurisdiction under S"ction ~4? 1, and therefore, does not have jurisdiction to modify the terms of the current custody agreement. 28. Under similar circumstances, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court determined that Pennsylvania connection with children who resided with the mother in Australia was minimal at best, and thus, Pennsylvania lacked jurisdiction over the custody matter pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA), due to the fact that the child's teachers, doctors, child care providers, and others who could best answer questions, regarding the life of the child, as related 0 the parents, would be found in Australia, not Pennsylvania. Zimhicki v 7imhicki, 810 A.2d 168 (Pa.Super. 2002). WHEREFORE, Defendant, Crystal D. Tollefson, respectfully requests this Honorable Court to enter an order sustaining her Preliminary Objections, as to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania exercising jurisdiction over Plaintiff's Complaint for Custody. Respectfully submitted, BUZGON DAVIS LAW OFFICES BY: Jason J. S 'binger, Esquire Attorney 1 . 11'86859 525 South Eighth Street Post Office Box 49 Lebanon, PA 17042-0049 (717) 274-1421 Attorneys for Defendant, Crystal D. Tollefson NELSON L. RITCHIE, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff : CUMBERLAKD COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA vs. : CIVIL ACTION - LAW CRYSTALD. TOLLEFSON, : NO. 05-3109 Defendant : IN CUSTODY AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF LEBANON ) I, AMANDA L. SNADER, an employee ofBuzgon Davis Law Offices, 525 South Eighth Street, Lebanon, Lebanon County, Pennsylvania, Attorneys for Defendant, Crystal D. Tollefson, being duly sworn according to law, depose and say that I filed on July 13,2005 the original Preliminary Objections and Praecipe For Listing Case For Argument in the Cumberland County Prothonotary's Office and a true and correct copy was hand delivered to Mark A. Mateya, Esquire, P.O. Box 127, Boiling Springs, P yl~i" 17007. Jhw. L' ! i r . VA AMANDA . NA ER - Sworn to and subscribed before me this 14th day of July, A.D., 2005. COMMONWEAL TH OF PENNSYLVANIA Notarial Seal Janelle K. Worcester. Notary Public Citt 01 Lebanon. Lebanon County My Commission Expires July 21. 2008 Member. Pennsylvania AssocIation Of Notaries ~ ~ 'e. \'- - ;;- Q, ~:rJ f\1 r....- _elf'\ ",0 7.':... \ ~~O ~,:'C'~~ ('lcI ;:sr.\ '-I 7~ ~ ',,,- ~. ~~ cp ',,) o - RECEIVED JUL 142005) v\ NELSON L. RITCHIE, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA v. : NO. 2005-3109 CIVIL TERM CRYSTAL D. TOLLEFSEN, Defendant : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this /6 ~ day of ::r~ ,2005, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows: 1. The Custody Conciliation Conference scheduled in the above referenced matter is continued generally pending the consideration of Preliminary Objections. 2. In the event that the Preliminary Objections are denied, either party may schedule another Conciliation Conference. 3. This Order is entered pursuant to an agreement ofthe parties at a Custody Conciliation Conference. The parties may modify the provisions ofthis Order by mutual consent. In the absence of mutual consent, the terms of this Order shall control. BY THE COURT, -//J J. cc:..Mark A. Mateya, Esquire, Counsel for Path v!'ason J. Schibinger, Esquire, Counsel for Mother NELSON L. RITCHIE, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. : 2005-3109 CIVIL TERM CRYSTAL D. TOLLEFSEN, Defendant : CIVIL ACTION -LAW : IN CUSTODY PRIOR JUDGE: None 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 Dakota Ann Ritchie June 24, 1992 Mother 2. A Conciliation Conference was held in this matter on July 14,2005, with the following individuals in attendance: The Father, Nelson L. Ritchie, with his counsel, Mark A. Mateya, Esquire, and Mother's counsel, Jason J. Schibinger, Esquire. 3. Mother's counsel filed Preliminary Objections on July 14, 2005. 4. The parties agreed to the entry of an Order in the form as attached. /-1'-1-05- Date l.0 - . NELSON L. RITCHIE, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA VS. : CIVIL ACTION - LAW CRYSTAL D. TOLLEFSEN Defendant : No. 05 - 3109 : IN CUSTODY PRAECIPE TO WITHDRAW COMPLAINT FOR CUSTODY AND NOW comes Plaintiff, Nelson L. Ritchie, by and through his counsel, Mark A. Mateya, Esquire, and requests this Honorable Court withdraw his Complaint for Custody. Counsel for Defendant is in agreement with this action. Respectfully submitted, , ~~'$ Mark A. Mateya, Esq e Attorney J.D. No. 78931 P.O. Box 127 Boiling Springs, P A 17007 (717) 241-6500 (717) 241-3099 Fax Date: g (l C{{O~ Counsel for Plaintiff r CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Mark A. Mateya, Esquire, hereby certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing Praecipe on the following person(s) by depositing a true and correct copy of the same in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, at Boiling Springs, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania addressed to: Jason J. Schiblinger, Esq. 525 South Eighth Street P.O. Box 49 Lebanon Pa. 17042-0049 Dated: g((qfor- k?:-}~~: PO Box 127 Boiling Springs, P A 17007 717 241-6500 Q ~t~. -, (~'- ~i~ \~ 1;\.; '?~'(. c-. -_.:" " t~~~ 3. ~ ~ ~ c> - .p ~ ?> '-? 0, f'" Q. :.t.-e "0::, ~,,-( . 'n ~~,~~ :..t,~ ;C") " ~~r..'t'\ .",,' ',-,\ 'J'-; ::4 - 24 Nelson L. Ritchie : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. Crystal D. Tollefson : NO. 05-3109 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, August 25, 2005, by agreement of counsel, the above-captioned matter is continued from the August 24, 2005 Argument Court list. Counsel is directed to relist the case when ready. By the Court, Jason J. Schibinger, Esquire F or the Plaintiff 1J.-C-o( ~ Mark A. Mateya, Esquire For the Defendant Court Administrator jk LO :t; Hd 92 ;}fW SOOZ 'U\.ila'\:^:'~'I-,:-i ' :::lHl :10 AUV.),. I~VI ._,-",..,.,0 -.II 38b}O-G3lI:l -