HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-5402
v.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO, O:J"'. Pi 02- GVJ '/.i-..
KELLY A. HOLJES,
Plaintiff
ROBERT D, HOLJES,
Defendant
CIVIL ACTION - CUSTODY
COMPLAINT FOR CUSTODY
AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Kelly A. Holjes, by and through her attorney, Gary L.
Kelley, and files this custody complaint, and in support thereof, respectfully avers as follows:
1. Plaintiff is Kelly A. Holjes who resides at 181 Cocolamus Creek Road,
Millerstown, Pennsylvania 17062,
2. Defendant is Robert D. Holjes who resides at 103 Fieldstone Drive, Carlisle,
Pennsylvania 17013,
3. Plaintiff seeks shared custody of the following children:
Name
Present J'esidence
Age
Richard R. Holjes
Chad D, Holjes
103 Fieldstone Drive
Carlisle
DOB 3/11/88
DOB 5/14/92
The children were born of the marriage.
4. During the past six (6) months, the children have resided with the following
persons and at the following addresses:
Persons
Addresses
Dates
Robert D. Holjes 103 Fieldstone Drive 12/04 to present
5. The mother of the children is the Plaintiff She is separated from the father of the
children.
6. The relationship of Plaintiff to the children is that of mother. Plaintiff currently
resides with the following persons:
Name
Relationship
N/A
7. The relationship of Defendant to the children is that offather. Defendant currently
resides with the following persons:
Name
Relationship
Richard R. Holjes
Chad D. Holjes
Son
Son
8. Plaintiff has not participated as a party or witness, or in another capacity, in other
litigation concerning the custody of the children in this or another court Plaintiff has no
information of a custody proceeding concerning the children pending in a court of this
Commonwealth. Plaintiff does not know of a person not a party to the proceedings who has
physical custody of the children or who claims to have custody or visitation rights with respect
to the children.
9, The best interest and permanent welfare of the children will be served by granting
the relief requested because:
Plaintiff is a fit parent
The children see Plaintiff as a source of love and affection.
Placing custody with Plaintiff will provide continuity, stability and certainty to the
children's lives.
Each parent whose parental rights to the children which has not been terminated and the
person who has physical custody of the children have been named as parties to this action.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court to grant shared legal and
physical custody of the children to Plaintiff.
Respectfully submitted,
Ga elley
ID 6801
132-134 Walnut Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
(717) 238-1484
Attorney for Plaintiff
VERIFICATION
I verifY that the statements made in this Complaint are true and correct. I understand
that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa,C.S, Section 4904,
relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
,/
.'
/;'
r-' 0
,':;;:;':'
~~:.-:-} -n
~ w'
p c?
-0 --- CO)
--- -"'
f'-,- ~
:ts;::::' ~ V'~ _..l
-,...)
~ ~ .,....,$~
s-- r:!
~\) 0 (0
~ ...c::.. N
...w
KELLY A. HOLJES
PLAINTIFF
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
05-5402
CIVIL ACTION LA W
ROBERT D. HOLJES
DEFENDANT
IN CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW,
Thurs~, October 20!_ 20~L__, upon consideration of the attached Complaint,
it is hereby directed that parties and their respective counsel appear before Dawn S. Sunday, Esq.
, the conci I iator,
at___.__~~_~~~.J\1aLI!,Street, Mechanicsbur.&..:fA 11~~?__ on ___~ed!!.~~~l!'y-,-.!'l.~__~~f!1.~~!J.~~OO~______ at _9:0,!__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 mav
provide grounds for entry of a temporary or permanent order,
The court hereby directs the parties to furnish any and all existing Protection from Abuse orders,
Special Relief orders, and Custody orders to the conciliator 48 hours prior to scheduled hearing.
FOR THE COURT,
By: Is/
Dawn S. Sunday, ES~___--11~_.
Custody Conciliator fl
The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County is required by la\\ 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 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 Bedtlxd Street
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
Telephone (717) 249-3166
-
. t ? 5- f?f'.uI ~ 'Xl oe (J/
4~Jt .~ ~ jPoC'(}1
r, (1 jp '7 11(.. . .47 yJ.riJ/
~ L/Y,' ~~ r~tl FV
'!II?;! 1f'IJ $'1'/ .
C:\), 'L\ q?\
,.,. ,.. ',_~ ".J,'
Jy
NOV 2 :3 ZIJU5 fil1
KELLY A HOLJES
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA
vs,
05-5402
CIVIL ACTION LAW
ROBERT D. HOLJES
Defendant
IN CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this ~ day of 10 0 v . , 2005, upon
consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows:
1. The Mother, Kelly A Holjes, and the Father, Robert D, Holjes, shall have shared legal
custody of Richard R. Holjes, born March 11, 1988 and Chad D. Holjes, born May 14, 1992. Each
parent shall have an equal right, to be exercised jointly with the other parent, to make all major non-
emergency decisions affecting the Children's general well-being including, but not limited to, all
decisions regarding their health, education and religion, Pursuant to the terms of this paragraph each
parent shall be entitled to all records and information pertaining to the Children including, but not
limited to, school and medical records and information,
2, The Father shall have primary physical custody ofthe Children,
3, The Mother shall have partial physical custody of the Children on Saturdays when she is not
working from 10:00 a,m. until 6:00 p,m" and on Saturdays when she is working, from 5:00 p,m, until
9:00 p.m, The Mother may have custody of the Children for extended periods or at additional times as
arranged by agreement between the parties,
4. The Mother shall have custody of the Children on Thanksgiving evening, with the times to
be arranged by agreement between the parties,
5, The parties shall engage in a minimum of three counseling sessions with a professional to be
selected by agreement between the parties. The purpose of the counseling shall be to assist the parties
in addressing and resolving underlying sources of conflict to enable the parties to improve their ability
to communicate on parenting issues. The parties shall select the professional and contact the
counselor's office within 10 days ofthe date of this Order to schedule the initial session, Any costs of
counseling which are not covered by insurance shall be shared equally between the parties,
6. Either party or counsel may contact the conciliator within two months of the Mother's
relocation of her residence to schedule an additional custody conciliation conference to review the
custody arrangements, if necessary,
"
Zll:C' 1'-,
>>'1'
At:i~'it;':
t".<;
C0
Pi":"17
l'JVl"
.:10
7, This Order is entered pursuant to an agreement of the parties at a custody conciliation
conference, The parties may modify the provisions of this Order by mutual consent. In the absence of
mutual consent, the terms of this Order shall control.
BY THE COURT,
~ ffl4
cc:.}(ary L. Kelley, Esquire - Counsel for Mother
/ames R, Demmel, Esquire - Counsel for Father
J
KELLY A. HOLIES
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs,
05-5402
CIVIL ACTION LAW
ROBERT D. HOLJES
Defendant
IN CUSTODY
CUSTODY CONCILIATION SUMMARY REPORT
IN ACCORDANCE WITH CUMBERLAND COUNTY RULE OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE 1915.3-8, the undersigned Custody Conciliator submits the following report:
L The pertinent information concerning the Children who are the subjects of this litigation is as
follows:
NAME
DATE OF BIRTH
CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF
Richard R. Holjes
Chad D. Holjes
March 11, 1988
May 14, 1992
Father
Father
2. A custody conciliation conference was held on November 16, 2005, with the following
individuals in attendance: The Mother, Kelly A. Holjes, with her counsel, Gary L. Kelley, Esquire, and
the Father, Robert D. Holjes, with his counsel, James R, Demmel, Esquire,
3, The parties agreed to entry of an Order in the fornl as attached,
Vo-d-.-d.
Dawn S, Sunday, Esquire r
Custody Conciliator
KELLY A. HOLJES,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
NO. 05-5402
ROBERT D. HOLJES,
Defendant
CIVIL ACTION - CUSTODY
PETITION FOR EMERGENCY RELIEF
AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Kelly A. Holjes, by and through her attorney, Gary L.
Kelley, and files this Petition For Emergency Relief, and in support thereof, respectfully avers
as follows:
1. Plaintiff is Kelly A. Holjes who resides at 181 Cocolamus Creek Road,
Millerstown, Pennsylvania 17062.
2. Defendant is Robert D. Holjes who resides at 103 Fieldstone Drive, Carlisle,
Pennsylvania 17013.
3. Plaintiff seeks primary custody of the following child:
Name
Present residence
Age
Chad D. Holjes
103 Fieldstone Drive
Carlisle
DOB 5/14/92
The child was born of the marriage.
4. The parties are husband and wife having been married on June 18, 2001 in
Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. The parties previously resided together for a number of years and
are also the parents of an older child, Richard, who has since graduated from high school last
year.
5. The parties separated in December 2004.
6. Wife moved from the marital residence after an extensive period of abuse by
Defendant.
7. Such abuse included such activities as the Defendant sniffing the Plaintiffs
underwear and asking who she had "f***ed" that evening.
8. The Plaintiff was also subjected to other humiliating behaviors in the presence of
the children.
9. At the time of their separation, the parties had agreed that they would share
custody of the minor children,
10. The Plaintiff agreed that the children could remain in the Cumberland Valley
School District to maintain continuity with the children's education.
11. Unfortunately, the Defendant reneged upon the parties' original agreement and
began undertaking a course of parental alienation against the Plaintiff after she moved from the
residence,
12. While the parties had an "informal" arrangement as to when she would see the
children, the Defendant began withholding the children and encouraging the children not to speak
with their mother.
13. When Plaintiff was relocating and taking some duplicative and basic needs
property from the marital residence, the Defendant informed the children that the Plaintiff was
taking property from the children and denying their basic needs,
14, In order to prevent the children from spending any meaningful time with the
Plaintiff, Defendant would purchase items for the children and, in effect, bribe them to keep them
from seeing their mother.
15. The Defendant failed to offer any meaningful supervIsIOn of the children and
refused to allow Plaintiff to maintain any active role with the children through his acts of parental
alienation,
16. Defendant willfully withheld crucial and life-threatening information regarding the
minor children from Plaintiff.
17. This information included the fact that Chad had been charged with other juveniles
for inflicting over Eight Thousand Dollars ($8,000.00) worth of vandalism upon various buildings
and residences.
18. Defendant failed to inform local probation authorities of mother's address and
telephone number.
19. It is believed and therefore averred that Defendant informed probation authorities
that mother had left the state and was not actively involved with the minor children.
20. As a result, Plaintiff was not contacted by probation authorities regarding the
child's charges.
21. Plaintiff only learned month's later by accident that the child had been charged and
was set for disposition,
22. Defendant failed to infonn mother of the fact that one or both of the children were
suffering from attendance problems at school.
23. Mother only learned of this problem after contacting school officials to learn how
the minor children were performing in school.
24. Defendant failed to inform Plaintiff of the fact that Richard had been cited at least
once for driving after hours upon a restricted operator's license.
25. Defendant failed to inform mother that Richard was involved in at least four (4)
serious traffic accidents where he was the driver.
26. Defendant left the children unsupervised at least seven (7) overnights during a two
(2) week period as he worked the night shift.
27. As a result of this lack of supervision, the minor children frequently stayed out all
hours of the night.
28. These actions caused the Plaintiff to file a custody complaint to seek shared
custody of the minor children.
29. A custody conciliation was held on or about November 16, 2005 before Dawn
Sunday, Esquire, the Custody Conciliator.
30, As a result, an Order was entered which granted the parties shared legal custody
and periods of alternating physical custody with Plaintiff on Saturdays dependent upon her work
schedule,
31. Defendant, rarely, if ever, followed the Order and soon again began undertaking
a course of parental alienation against Plaintiff.
32. Defendant again began withholding the children from Plaintiff.
33. Despite Defendant's efforts, Plaintiff was able to re-establish a relationship with
the children.
34. Unfortunately, Defendant still refused to allow Plaintiff to supervise the children
during the nights in which he worked, which was as previously set forth was seven overnights
during a fourteen day period.
35. The children again began getting into trouble.
36. Plaintiff learned that Chad was recently expelled from Cumberland Valley High
School for skipping school and being found to be under the influence of marijuana during the
school day.
37. Defendant was aware of Chad's marijuana use as documented by school officials
but never informed Plaintiff of the problem.
38. Chad is presently attending one (1) night school class per week for five (5) hours
and Defendant is refusing to cooperate to have the child enrolled in any other school.
Plaintifthas been undertaking all efforts to have the child enrolled in alternative education or a
parochial schooL
39. Defendant continues to allow the child to remain unsupervised for seven (7) nights
in a two (2) week period and provides minimal supervision during the day as he (the Defendant)
is sleeping,
40. Plaintiff recently learned that the child was charged last week with possession of
paraphernalia and possibly a small amount of marijuana only days after he had been expelled
from schooL
41. As a result, the child has been placed in probation again and has been assigned
additional community service hours.
42. Since the Conciliation Conference on November 16, 2006, Defendant, despite
Plaintiffs repeated requests and efforts, has refused to allow Plaintiff to play any significant role
with decisionmaking in the child's life and has withheld important information regarding the child
from her.
43. Defendant has informed the minor child that the child shall agree to only shared
physical custody with his mother or he (Defendant) will inform the childts Juvenile Probation
Officer of some unspecified violations allegedly committed by the child.
44. If Plaintiff were granted primary custody, she would immediately enroll the child
in alternative eduacation classes or enroll him at Trinity High School so the child could finish
his ninth grade year. She would also maintain a strict drug testing policy for the child with the
cooperation of juvenile probation authorities.
45, Without the immediate intervention of this Honorable Court, the child will not
have the needed supervision and he will continue to miss school and undertake any meaningful
education.
46. Without the immediate intervention of this Honorable Court, the minor child will
continue to be needlessly involved with the legal system.
47. It is in the best interest of the minor child that the child be immediately placed
with his mother so that he will be appropriately supervised and can continue with an appropriate
high school education,
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court to grant shared legal and
J'
primary physical custody of the child to Plaintiff pending further Order of Court.
Respectfully submitted,
Ga
ID 801
1119 Front Street, Suite B
Harrisburg, P A 17101
(717) 238-1484
Attorney for Plaintiff
VERIFICATION
I verify that the statements made in this Complaint are true and correct. I understand that
false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C .S, Section 4904, relating to
unsworn falsification to authorities.
Date: rUatJ/06
.
/~~#p~
~
KELLY A. HOLJES,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
NO. 05-5402
ROBERT D. HOLJES,
Defendant
CIVIL ACTION - CUSTODY
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, GARY L. KELLEY, Esquire, attorney for PLAINTIFF in the above-captioned matter,
do hereby certifY that I served a true and correct copy of PLAINTIFF'S CUSTODY
COMPLAINT and PETITION FOR EMERGENCY RELIEF on counsel for Defendant on the
29th day of December, 2006 by First Class US Mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
James R. Demmel, Esq.
4431 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110-1778
By:
G , Esquire
I.D~' 680 I
1119 North Front Street, Suite B
Harrisburg, P A 17102
(717) 238-1484
Attorney for Plaintiff
',,-
'.::f::\.
~)
-z.
,
w
1~
~
~
~
"
A...",
~
~ ~,
~
'J
.\~
S'>
v)
~
< KELLY A. HOLJES,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
ROBERT D. HOLJES,
Defendant
NO. 05-5402 CIVIL TERM
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 8th day of January, 2007, upon consideration of Plaintiffs
Emergency Petition for Emergency Relief, this matter is referred to the custody
conciliation process pursuant to C.C.R.P. 1915.12-1, and the Court Administrator is
requested to facilitate this referral.
BY THE COURT,
/ary L. Kelley, Esq.
1119 Front Street, Suite B
Harrisburg, P A 1710 1
Attorney for Plaintiff
hs R. Demmel, Esq.
4431 North Front Street
Harrisburg, P A 17110-1778
Attorney for Defendant
Court Administrator_ Atl/Jd ~JJ
;--Cj-cJ 1 /Iv
-,
.I/~~
:rc
VINVr\lASNN3d
'I i Nf\rn ri~.'r:'~:1qlf;!fll"'\
'\..i.. 1 1\'-" ,j ',I' . ".;" ,<~..r'I. .J
6 ~ :2 Wd 6- NiT lOOl
AtNIONOHl08d 3Hl :10
381:130-0318
KELLY A, HOLJES
PLA INTIFF
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v,
05-5402
CIVIL ACTION LAW
ROBERT D, HOLJES
IN CUSTODY
DEFENDANT
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW,
Friday, Janua..!L!b_~007
, upon consideration of the attached Complaint,
it is hereby directed that paJiies and their respective counsel appear before Dawn S. Sunday, Esq. , the conciliator,
at,_.._~~~,~,:st Main Stre!!LM.~,chanicsburgL~~_.!7,~_?_?__ on _'"!:!!~~!Iay, February 13,! 2007 at 10:30 AM
for a Pre-Hearing Custody Conference, At such conference, an effort will be made to resolve the issues in dispute; or
if this cannot be accomplished, to define and narrow the issues to be heard by the court, and to enter into a temporary
order. 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 hearing.
FOR THE COURT.
By: /s/
Dawn S. Sunday, Esq.
Custody Conciliator
~
The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County is required by law to comply with the Americans
with Oisabilites Act of 1990, For information about accessible facilities and reasonable accommodations
available to disabled individuals having business before the cOLlli, 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 THE OFFICE SET
FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WIIERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP.
Cumberland County Bar Association
32 South Bedford Street
Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013
Telephone (717) 249-3166
4~p ~ /?~~?
~~?~/~IA
W~ f/P?- ~~~~J-p?}
h (' 'c. I' J 0
'.... ....., ,:Q ] I 'Jffl'" L(lnl7
. It 'U Jth..
) ;..,",_/' ('," 'F' " "~I
\Ut_LV,i\' ",'.';\' l,.:..! :Jtll \,0
"", ,,--,,,/, I..... jl....llJ ;;r~ -I'
jOI,:!.-iCHJ311:l -
(O-'?/-/
(0 9/./
(0-1/ .(
KELLY A. HOLJES,
PLAINTIFF
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
NO. 05-5402
ROBERT D. HOLJES,
DEFENDANT
CIVIL ACTION - CUSTODY
DEFENDANT'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF
AND NOW, comes Defendant, Robert Holjes, by and through his counsel, Smigel,
Anderson & Sacks, LLP, and files this Answer to Plaintiffs Petition for Special Relief and in
support thereof avers as follows:
1. Admitted.
2. Admitted.
3. Admitted.
4. Admitted.
5. Admitted.
6. Denied. Defendant denies that he ever physically abused Plaintiff.
7. Denied. Defendant denies that he ever sniffed Plaintiff s underwear and asked
who she had "fI'**ed" that evening. By way of further answer, near the date of separation,
Defendant was aware of the adulterous affair Plaintiff had been carrying on for months prior to
when she actually left the marital residence and knew the identity of the man with whom
Plaintiff was having an affair.
8. Denied. Defendant denies that he subjected Plaintiff to any humiliating behaviors
in front of the children. By way of further answer, Plaintiff was frequently absent from the
marital home for days at a time prior to the parties' separation and Defendant made great efforts
I
to prevent the children from making judgments about Plaintiffs absences. When Plaintiff was
present, she was frequently intoxicated and engaged in humiliating behavior in front of the
children with no input from Defendant.
9. Denied. Defendant denies that the parties agreed to share custody of the minor
children at the time of their separation. When Plaintiff left the marital home to live with her
paramour, she made no effort to arrange any custody arrangements for the children.
10. Denied. Defendant denies that Plaintiff agreed for the children to remain in the
Cumberland Valley School District. When Plaintiff left the marital home to live with her
paramour, and even before she left the marital home, she showed no interest in whether the
children attended school or where they attended.
11, Denied. Defendant denies that the parties ever had an agreement regarding
custody of the children. Defendant denies that he made any efforts to alienate Plaintiff from the
children after she left the marital home. Plaintiff alienated herself from the children by refusing
to spend time with them, Defendant encouraged both children to spend time with Plaintiff and
encouraged them to have a positive relationship with Plaintiff.
12. Denied. Defendant denies that the parties had an "informal" arrangement
regarding when Plaintiff would spend time with the children. Defendant denies that he ever
withheld the children from Plaintiff or encouraged the children not to speak with Plaintiff. When
Plaintiff left the marital home to live with her paramour, she did not make any arrangements to
spend time with the children, After Plaintiff left the marital home, Defendant encouraged the
children to speak with her by telephone and to spend time with her.
2
13. Denied. Defendant denies that when Plaintiff left the marital home to live with
her paramour she took "some duplicative and basic needs property" from the marital residence.
Defendant denies that he told the children that Plaintiff was taking their property or denying their
basic needs. Prior to actually leaving the marital home, during the months when Plaintiff was
spending days at a time with her paramour and having no contact with Defendant or the children,
Plaintiff took large amounts of personal property from the marital home, presumably moving
these items to her paramour's home. When Plaintiffleft the marital home in December 2004,
she took the parties' bedroom furniture (including the bed), items of the children's personal
property, articles of Defendant's clothing and some of Defendant's nonmarital assets. The
children clearly observed the furniture missing from Defendant's bedroom, their missing items
and the missing basic necessities such as kitchen utensils. Additionally, the children were home
when Plaintiff and several intoxicated friends and/or relatives came to the marital home while
Defendant was at work and ransacked the marital home, going so far as to tear the wall-mounted
television from the kitchen wall.
14. Denied. Defendant denies that he ever bought the children items in order to bribe
them to keep them from seeing Plaintiff. Defendant encouraged the children the spend time with
Plaintiff and encouraged Plaintiff to spend time with the children. However, the children were
angry with Plaintiff for leaving the marital home and Plaintiff absolutely refused to acknowledge
that the children had any reason to be angry with her. Plaintiff actually expected the children to
apologize to her for being angry.
15. Denied. Defendant denies that he failed to supervise the children. Defendant
denies that he refused to allow Plaintiff to maintain an active role with the children or that he in
3
any way alienated the children from Plaintiff. Defendant has provided supervision for the
children and has encouraged Plaintiff to be actively involved in the children's lives, but Plaintiff
has been too preoccupied with her own social calendar to spend time with the children.
16. Denied. Defendant denies that he ever withheld crucial or life-threatening
information regarding the children from Plaintiff.
17. Denied, Defendant denies that he withheld any information regarding Chad's
charge of vandalism from Plaintiff.
18. Denied. Defendant denies that he failed to inform the local probation authorities
of Plaintiff s address and phone number.
19. Denied. Defendant denies that he informed the probation authorities that Plaintiff
had left the state and was not actively involved with the children.
20. Denied. Defendant is unaware of whether Plaintiff was contacted by the
probation authorities regarding Chad's charges. Therefore, this averment is denied.
21. Denied, Defendant is unaware of when and how Plaintiffleamed of Chad's
charges, Therefore, this averment is denied.
22. Denied, Defendant denies that he failed to inform Plaintiff that either of the
children was having school attendance problems.
23. Denied. Defendant is unaware of Plaintiffs contact with school officials.
Therefore, this averment is denied
24. Denied. Defendant denies that he failed to inform Plaintiff that Richard had been
cited for driving after hours with a restricted drivers license. By way of further answer,
4
Defendant was not aware of this citation until he read the averment in Plaintiffs petition.
Apparently, Plaintiff knew of this alleged violation and failed to inform Defendant of it.
25. Denied. Defendant denies that he failed to inform Plaintiff that Richard had been
involved in at least four serious traffic accidents in which he was the driver. By way of further
answer, Defendant was not aware of these accidents until he read the averment in Plaintiffs
petition. Apparently, Plaintiff knew of these alleged accidents and failed to inform Defendant of
them.
26, Denied. Defendant denies that he left the children unsupervised at least seven
overnights during a two week period.
27. Denied, Defendant denies that the children frequently stayed out all hours of the
night.
28. Denied. Defendant does not know Plaintiffs motivation behind filing the custody
complaint in October 2005, but Defendant does not believe that Plaintiffs motivation was based
on Defendant's actions. Since Plaintiff had shown no genuine interest in spending time with the
children since December 2004, Defendant believes and therefore avers that Plaintiffs primary
motivation for filing her custody complaint in October 2005 was to reduce or eliminate her child
support obligation.
29. Admitted.
30. Admitted.
31. Denied. Defendant denies that he failed to follow the terms of the custody Order
and denies that he attempted to alienate the children from Plaintiff. By way of further answer,
Defendant complied with the terms of the court Order, but Plaintiff almost immediately stopped
5
II
exercising her periods of physical custody and returned to her previous pattern of ignoring the
children.
32. Denied. Defendant denies that he has withheld the children from Plaintiff.
Despite Defendant's repeated efforts to encourage a positive relationship between the children
and Plaintiff, she has until very recently shown little or no interest in the children.
33. Denied. Defendant denies that he ever opposed the children having a relationship
with Plaintiff. To the contrary, Defendant has consistently encouraged the children to have a
positive relationship with Plaintiff.
34, Denied. Defendant denies that he refused to allow Plaintiff to supervise the
children during the nights that he worked,
35. Denied. Defendant is unaware of the time frame to which Plaintiff is referring
and is unaware of what Plaintiffs very general statement that "the children again began getting
into trouble" means, Therefore, this averment is denied.
36. Admitted in part. Defendant admits that Chad has been expelled from school for
leaving school grounds without permission, possessing cigarettes and using marijuana. This
incident occurred while Chad was in Plaintiffs care and custody. During a brief 48-hour period
when Chad was with Plaintiff, she allowed him to smoke cigarettes and actually purchased
cigarettes for him. Despite Defendant's warnings to Plaintiff that he made Chad account for any
and all money he spent, Plaintiff gave Chad twenty ($20) dollars without making him
accountable for why he wanted it. Chad then took the cigarettes and money to school and ended
up being expelled. School officials contacted Plaintiff regarding Chad's expulsion, and Plaintiff
called Defendant to pick up Chad from school, which he did. More recently, Plaintiff allowed
6
Chad to spend the night with a friend (who had also been expelled from school) on what should
have been a school night and Chad had another run-in with police when he and his friend
apparently used the friend's parents' car in the middle of the night without their permission.
37. Denied. Defendant denies that he was aware of Chad's marijuana use but never
informed Plaintiff.
38. Admitted in part and denied in part. Defendant admits that Chad is attending one
night school class per week. Defendant denies that he is refusing to cooperate in having Chad
enroll in any other school. Defendant has been actively involved with the school district to find
appropriate school placement for Chad.
39. Denied. Defendant denies that Chad is unsupervised for seven nights in a two-
week period and denies that he provides minimal supervision during the day.
40. Denied. Defendant denies that Chad has been charged with any crime.
41. Denied. Defendant denies that Chad has been placed on probation again or that
he has been assigned additional community service hours.
42, Denied. Defendant denies that since the conciliation conference on November 16,
2005 (erroneously dated November 16,2006 in Plaintiffs petition) he has refused to allow
Plaintiff to playa significant role with decision-making in Chad's life or withheld important
information regarding Chad from Plaintiff. Plaintiff has chosen to distance herself from Chad
and has refused to be involved in his life, despite Defendant's encouragement to both Chad and
Plaintiff to establish a positive relationship. Plaintiffs chosen method of involvement in Chad's
life has been to buy him cigarettes, allow him to use vulgar language and to give him unrestricted
7
[-
use of cash. Plaintiffs involvement in Chad's life has facilitated his expulsion from school and
additional contact with the police,
43. Denied. Defendant denies that he ever threatened Chad as described by Plaintiff.
44. Denied. Defendant is without sufficient knowledge or information regarding
Plaintiff s plans if she had primary physical custody of Chad to admit or deny this averment.
Therefore, it is denied. By way of further answer, Defendant does not believe that it is in Chad's
best interests to be in Plaintiffs primary physical custody.
45. Denied. Defendant denies that Chad will not have the necessary supervision, will
continue to miss school and will not undertake any meaningful education without the immediate
intervention of this Honorable Court.
46. Denied. Defendant denies that without this Honorable Court's immediate
intervention, Chad will continue to be needlessly involved with the legal system.
47. Denied. Defendant denies that it is in Chad's best interest to be in Plaintiffs
primary physical custody.
WHEREFORE, Defendant, Robert Holjes, respectfully requests that this Honorable
Court enter an order denying Plaintiffs Petition for Special Relief.
Respectfully submitted,
SMIGEL, ANDERSON & SACKS, LLP
By:
L Y S ige, Esquire LD.09617
J mes . Demmel, Esquire LD.90918
4 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PAl 711 0
(717) 234-2401
Attorneys for Defendant
8
VERIFICATION
I, Robert Holjes, verify that the statements contained in the foregoing pleading are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I understand that false
statements therein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C,S. 94904, relating to unsworn
falsification to authorities.
Date: I /3f JOT
I I
~)~
RObe.rtJt6lJes
l
II
I-
KELLY A. HOLJES,
PLAINTIFF
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
NO. 05-5402
ROBERT D, HOLJES,
DEFENDANT
CIVIL ACTION - CUSTODY
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, James R. Demmel, Esquire, attorney for Defendant in the above-captioned matter, do
hereby certify that I served a true and correct copy of Defendant's Answer to Plaintiffs Petition
for Special Relief on counsel for Plaintiff by depositing same in the U.S. Mail, postage prepaid
for first class mail, on January 11,2007, addressed as follows:
GARY L. KELLEY, ESQUIRE
1119 NORTH FRONT STREET, SUITE B
HARRISBURG, PA 17102
Courtesy copy to:
DAWN S. SUNDAY, ESQUIRE
39 WEST MAIN STREET
MECHANICSBURG, P A 17055
SMIGEL, ANDERSON & SACKS, LLP
By:
oy S ige, Esquire LD.09617
ames . Demmel, Esquire LD.90918
44 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110
(717) 234-2401
Attorneys for Defendant
9
(-'
.'
("
r-..)
c>
-n
:-.1
_.-.~.j
I
r"v
--
.J
( ,
~ ~,"J
.<
f.EB 16 200r
KELLY A. HOLJES
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs,
05-5402
CIVIL ACTION LAW
ROBERT D. HOLJES
Defendant
IN CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this z.tJ tl day of r-=eb. , 2007, upon
consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows:
1. The prior Order of this Court dated November 28,2005 shall continue in effect as modified
by this Order.
2. The parties shall share having physical custody ofthe Child in accordance with the
following bi-weekly schedule:
A. Week I: During Week I, the Father shall have custody of the Child from
Wednesday at 3:00 p.m. through Saturday at 3:00 p.m. and the Mother shall have custody from
Saturday at 3 :00 p.m. through Wednesday at 3 :00 p.m.
B. Week II: During Week II, the Father shall have custody ofthe Child from
Wednesday at 3:00 p.m. through Sunday at 3:00 p.m. and the Mother shall have custody from Sunday
at 3:00 p.m. through Wednesday at 3:00 p.m.
3. The parties shall cooperate in discussing and establishing consistent rules on issues related
to the Child such as curfew, discipline, and participation in sleepovers.
4. The parties shall continue to cooperate in investigating school enrollment options for the
Child both for the remainder of the 2006-2007 school year and future years.
5. 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,
o I : II WV 82 83.:1 LOOl
Ai:fv'lONOH.HJlJd 3H1 .:lO
3Jl::HO-Q311:l
KELLY A. HOLJES
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs.
05-5402
CIVIL ACTION LAW
ROBERT D. HOLJES
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
Chad D. Holjes
May 14, 1992
Father/Mother
2. A custody conciliation conference was held on February 13, 2007, with the following
individuals in attendance: the Mother, Kelly A. Holjes, with her counsel, Gary L. Kelley, Esquire and
the Father, Robert D. Roljes, with his counsel, James R. Demmel, Esquire.
3. The parties agreed to entry of an Order in the form as attached.
{e,b~dd 020,' .;leo7
Date
tJ/L.~
Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire
Custody Conciliator