HomeMy WebLinkAbout94-02016
j,.;"
~
;,<'.,.,
t.':\~"
~{ .
.. '
"'fJ
{
~
~
.0
<i
I
I
\,
~i
~
J!,
i
. '
j
I
......,
-
~
. ~ "v ,............
TERRI L. PRICE, MOTHER I IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
. CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
.
I
V. I
I
I 94-2016 CIVIL TERM t/
GARY A. RAYBART, FATHER I NO.
I
. NO. 94-21S8 CIVIL TERM
.
IN RE I INTERIM CUSTODY
BEFORE SHEELY. PRESIDENT JUDGE
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 23rd day of AUGUST, 1996, after a hearing held
on August 19, 1996, at which the Court heard testimony of Terri
L. Price and Gary A. Rayhart regarding custody of their child
Stephanie, Mr. Rayhart indicated that he wished to call a further
witness. Continuation of this hearing was therefore scheduled
for Monday, September, 30, 1996, at 9:00 a.m.. In the interim,
and on a temporary basis, it is hereby ordered and directed that
Terri L. Price shall have primary physical custody.of Stephanie
so that she can be registered for school.
By' t e Court,
,~'
.J.
Samuel W. Milkes, Esquire
For the Natural Mother
Dan Pollock, Esquire
For the Natural Father
:sld
'* fiuuJ CofJY_ tnIt.llanE.'I_ Sc,J,(J()/ flJrn"~/sfRAioll ;.t!(j-/,'/18'
f #;.3 -1IP
>- IX) G
0; ..:: .;~
t .. ~J~
- .J~
('3 :r: ._1....
:r ..-..: 1~
,-- .-0;::
0 C"') ,:~Cl)
n: N ., 2:
L:.. C:C5
L'I ~ d~
i!c ~ ,-
~"
II.. '0 ::>
0 O'l U
TERRI L. PRICE, MOTHER IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
GARY A. RAYHART, FATHER NO. 94-2016 CIVIL TERM
NO. 94-2158 CIVIL TERM ~
* fAx &J Co,oy_ mil. lIud~'/_ Sc,hoo/ AJrn"~/slRrtioll ;.1-0 -/,'i98'
(? - 1 2 -1~
IN REs INTERIM CUSTODY
BEFORE SHBBLY. PRESIDBNT JUDGB
ORDBR OF COURT
AND NOW, this 23rd day of AUGUST, 1996, after a hearing held
on August 19, 1996, at which the Court heard testimony of Terri
L. Price and Gary A. Rayhart regarding custody of their child
Stephanie, Mr. Rayhart indicated that he wished to call a further
witness. Continuation of this hearing was therefore scheduled
for Monday, September, 30, 1996, at 9:00 a.m.. In the interim,
and on a temporary basis, it is hereby ordered and directed that
Terri L. Price shall have primary physical custody.of Stephanie
so that she can be registered for school.
By' t e Court,
- C\.- t
arold E. Sheel
\~
~--
Samuel W. Milkes, Esquire
For the Natural Mother
Dan Pollock, Esquire
For the Natural Father
:s1d
Ot2-I'9'N:IL -f?Lr.rL p!J-J!9fQ
-I V 9 "1- ';"0 I f.:, C!.;u I '( k~
TERRI L. PRICE,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
NO. 94-2016 CIVIL TERM ,/
GARY A. RAYHART,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
TERRI L. PRICE, NO. 94-2158 CIVIL TERM
Defendant
IN RE: CUSTODY
BEFORE SHEELY. P.J.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
Pursuant to our order of January 22, 1996, plaintiff
(mother) has had temporary physical custody of the daughter of
the parties, Stephanie Bea Rayhart, born August 27, 1991, on
alternating weekends from Friday at 6:00 p.m. until Sunday at
6:00 p.m. and every Wednesday from 8:30 a.m. until 4:15 p.m..
Defendant (father) has had primary physical custody of Stephanie
since an order of this court dated December 14, 1994. The
parties appeared before the custody conciliator on January 11,
1996, on petition by plaintiff for primary physical custody of
Stephanie. Custody was not resolved at that hearing, and we held
a hearing on April 1, 1996.
Based on the testimony presented at the April 1 hearing, a
new partial custody schedule for June, July and August of 1996,
is set as follows:
,..._..-....._,,'~._>,,' ,~._,.,.,~
~
NO. 94-2016
94-2158 CIVIL TERM
Starting Sunday, June 23, 1996, at 5:00 p.m., plaintiff
shall have partial custody of Stephanie for one (1) week until
Sunday, June 30, 1996, at 5:00 p.m.. Defendant shall have
custody on Wednesday, June 26, 1996, from 3:00 p.m. until 8:00
p.m.
Defendant shall have custody from Sunday, June 30, 1996, at
5:00 p.m. until Sunday, July 7, 1996, at 5:00 p.m.. Plaintiff
shall have custody on Wednesday, July 3, 1996, from 3:00 p.m.
until 8:00 p.m..
The parties shall alternate weeks in this manner until a new
hearing which I now set for Monday, August 19, 1996, at 1:30 p.m.
in Courtroom i 1.
At that hearing, the Court will hear testimony as to how
these longer periods of custody with Mother and a new step-father
are going, since I was told at the hearing that plaintiff and
Thomas French plan to marry on July 11, 1996.
No finding of contempt is entered against the defendant as
of now, but the Court directs that he comply with this order as
set forth herein until changed by the Court.
>. co
c: ....
'c
~,
wQ N ~I~
If( .' ..,
=--: ~;~
'f'c c... ~... -...
9.:, "J ..1~
Cl' ' "J
ll'L;.. ' ...
fi\' ..J,.
~. ,.-,
:: ";;p
F: ==; ~~'1 a..
~' ~o ;;J
-, 0'\ U
..+
.
NO. 94-2016
94-2158 CIVIL TERM
ORDBR
AND NOW, this 10th day of JUNE, 1996, a new partial custody
schedule for Stephanie B. Rayhart for June, July and August of
1996 is set as follows:
Starting Sunday, June 23, 1996, at 5100 p.m., plaintiff
shall have partial custody of Stephanie for one (1) week until
Sunday, June 30, 1996, at 5:00 p.m.. Defendant shall have
custody on Wednesday, June 26, 1996, from 3100 p.m. until 8100
p.m.
Defendant shall have custody from Sunday, June 30, 1996, at
5:00 p.m. until Sunday, July 7, 1996, at 5:00 p.m.. Plaintiff
shall have custody on Wednesday, July 3, 1996, from 3:00 p.m.
until 8:00 p.m..
The parties shall alternate weeks in this manner until a new
hearing which I now set for Monday, August 19, 1996, at 1:30 p.m.
in Courtroom # 1.
Samuel Milkes, Esq.
For the Plaintiff
Hr 1:1 C~tg~
~Old B. Sheely, P.J.
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
For the Defendant
:sld
~ ,,,,,- U.4.,,'h\.C':.t...l 10 I F~.I 'lID ~
.......It" ...!>. Q .
. ..
TERRI L. PRICE,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
NO. 94-2016 CIVIL TERM
GARY A. RAY HART , .
.
Plaintiff .
.
.
.
V. .
.
.
.
TERRI L. PRICE, .
.
Defendant .
.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 94-2158
CIVIL TERM v
(')
~
." ft
me
-"'-......'
71-
Cf).
~i.'
.,..
~c'
...~.~
~~-\. '
~~~
,0 ~
o~
,- :;:l
Co '-i:n
."..
~- '~Z
l'''> ...:.J
~ ;~-n
;' .:1.1
~Cl
r:- urn
.0 ~
0 ::..
(.oJ -<:
IN RE:
CUSTODY
BEFORE SHEELY. P.J.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
,
...,
Pursuant to our order of January 22, 1996, plaintiff
(mother) has had temporary physical custody of the daughter of
the parties, Stephanie Bea Rayhart, born August 27, 1991, on
alternating weekends from Friday at 6:00 p.m. until Sunday at
6:00 p.m. and every Wednesday from 8:30 a.m. until 4:lS p.m..
Defendant (father) has had primary physical custody of Stephanie
since an order of this court dated December 14, 1994. The
parties appeared before the custody conciliator on January 11,
1996, on petition by plaintiff for primary physical custody of
Stephanie. Custody was not resolved at that hearing, and we held
a hearing on April 1, 1996.
Based on the testimony presented at the April 1 hearing, a
new partial custody schedule for June, July and August of 1996,
is set as follows:
'.
NO. 94-2016
94-2158 CIVIL TERM
Starting Sunday, June 23, 1996, at 5:00 p.m., plaintiff
shall have partial custody of Stephanie for one (1) week until
Sunday, June 30, 1996, at 5:00 p.m.. Defendant shall have
custody on Wednesday, June 26, 1996, from 3:00 p.m. until 8:00
p.m.
Defendant shall have custody from Sunday, June 30, 1996, at
5:00 p.m. until Sunday, July 7, 1996, at 5:00 p.m.. Plaintiff
shall have custody on Wednesday, July 3, 1996, from 3:00 p.m.
until 8:00 p.m..
The parties shall alternate weeks in this manner until a new
hearing which I now set for Monday, August 19, 1996, at 1:30 p.m.
in Courtroom' 1.
At that hearing, the Court will hear testimony as to how
these longer periods of custody with Mother and a new step-father
are going, since I was told at the hearing that plaintiff and
Thomas French plan to marry on July 11, 1996.
No finding of contempt is entered against the defendant as
of now, but the Court directs that he comply with this order as
set forth herein until changed by the Court.
>. <Xl
C;'
~-! .
w~.... "I . ..~
<.)'
r-i: ::.; ,
....., "
"r. -=j
9.: "
C! ~ ~ ,
L: ,., "
, .
t::" - ':j
,. ~ , ,:1-
l' " . I
C' .;,,~ ,.>
. '.
NO. 94-2016
94-2158 CIVIL TERM
ORDER
AND NOW, this 10th day of JUNE, 1996, a new partial custody
schedule for Stephanie B. Rayhart for June, July and August of
1996 is set as follows:
Starting Sunday, June 23, 1996, at 5:00 p.m., plaintiff
shall have partial custody of Stephanie for one (1) week until
Sunday, June 30, 1996, at 5:00 p.m.. Defendant shall have
custody on Wednesday, June 26, 1996, from 3:00 p.m. until 8:00
p.m.
Defendant shall have custody from Sunday, June 30, 1996, at
5:00 p.m. until Sunday, July 7, 1996, at 5:00 p.m.. Plaintiff
shall have custody on Wednesday, July 3, 1996, from 3:00 p.m.
until 8:00 p.m..
The parties shall alternate weeks in this manner until a new
hearing which I now set for Monday, August 19, 1996, at 1:30 p.m.
in Courtroom' 1.
Samuel Mi1kes, Esq.
For the Plaintiff
Br c\ CFt~r__
~ E. Sheely, P.J.
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
For the Defendant
:sld
e.~~<l., !)"-,,J....\. lei, ~/'l1D.,
'. .".':,.~. ,
C'--G
Hod E. Slieelyj
~
TERRI L. PRICE.
Plaintiff
V.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
94-2016 CIVIL TERM ~
94-2158 CIVIL TERM
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
IN RE:
HEARING CONTINUED
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW. this 1st day of April, 1996, the Court
heard the testimony of Terri L. Price and her witnesses, and the
Court has heaard the testimony of Gary A. Rayhart, and he has
other witnesses that he does wish to call. Therefore. the
hearing is continued until Friday, May 10th, 1996, at 9:00 a.m.
I have set aside that whole day so that we can conclue all of
the testimony at that time. Pending a final decision on this
case, the Court directs that both parties comply with the
December 14th. 1994, order. and also with the order of January
22nd, 1996.
By the Court.
Samuel W. Milkes. Esquire
For the Plaintiff
- ~,,-,~A l.fN/%.
),f.
Dan Pollock, Esquire
For the Defendant
mal
TERRI L. PRICE. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW
GARY A. RAYHART. 94-2016 CIVIL TERM
Defendant 94-2158 CIVIL TERM 0/'
IN RE: HEARING CONTINUED
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW. this 1st day of April, 1996, the Court
heard the testimony of Terri L. Price and her witnesses. and the
Court has heaard the testimony of Gary A. Rayhart, and he has
other witnesses that he does wish to call. Therefore. the
hearing is continued until Friday. May 10th. 1996, at 9:00 a.m.
I have set aside that whole day so that we can conclue all of
the testimony at that time. Pending a final decision on this
case. the Court directs that both parties comply with the
December 14th. 1994. order, and also with the order of January
22nd. 1996.
By the Court.
I
I
,- '. i"
, . -
H 0
Samuel W. Milkes. Esquire
For the Plaintiff
".\> .'...............l..,l
- ......"j....... '-
'TN I qt".
;. f.
Dan Pollock, Esquire
For the Defendant
mal
, nl l C7'I-J"/I.
OI~IC(I'-'';)'- -\; ':, ~
f)r" l It, 1r;r,I~
h .
TERRI L. PRICE, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V. : CIV:J:L ACTION - LAW
. TERM /'
.
GARY A. RAYHART, 94-2016 CIVIL
Defendant : 94-2158 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: PETITION TO ADJUDICATE IN CONTEMPT
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW. this 1st day of April, 1996, the Order
of Court dated January 22nd, 1996, provides, among other things,
that Mr. Rayhart would provide Terri L. Price with temporary
custody of their daughter, Stephanie. every Wednesday from 8:30
a.m. until 4:15 p.m.
A petition has been filed with this Court
alleging that Mr. Rayhart has failed to comply with this order
in that on Wednesday. March 20th, 1996, and on Wednesday, March
27th. 1996. he did not comply with this order, one time
resulting in the Carlisle Police having to take him into
custody. and the other one it was not until later in the morning
that the mother was able to obtain custody.
Mr. Rayhart has admitted those particular facts,
and that he did not deliver custody of Stephanie as he was
supposed to have done. Therefore. the Court
adjudicates him in contempt of court for failing to comply
with the directed order for Stephanie on the two dates alleged.
His testimony was that he forgot. I'm not so
sure if that.s truthful or not. but. in any event. at this time
I will not impose any jail sentence on the finding of contempt.
and because of his limited income. I don't wish to take any of
that money in imposing a fine.
However. I will direct Mr. Rayhart that I will
,-'.- -- --~."
-"r
expeot him in the future to oomply with this order until it's
ohanged, and if there are any further violations of the order of
the magnitude that I heard here today, then he will go to jail.
By the Court.
JlcNl I~~
Harold E. Sheely, P.J.
Samuel W. Milkes, Esquire
Por the Plaintiff
COFcJ ~ 'fh~~f>'
Dan Pollook, Esquire
Por the Defendant
mal
-+
r~l r.'r"\ r'......:....-:
.:.1. ",l .
.~ ...
....-..,
,:
~sr.r.~-~l
". ...
;.' ,.,5
l,i
('I ,.
_'.J..
..'10. .'-
r.-.r 1;':: \'L\'}\', ~'A
,.,.
,.
..
TERRI L. PRICE, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
.
.
V. . CIVIL ACTION - LAW
.
.
.
GARY A. RAYHART, 94-2016 CIVIL TERM
Defendant 94-2158 CIV:J:L TERM ...........
IN RE: PETITION TO ADJUDICATE IN CONTEMPT
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 1st day of April, 1996, the Order
of Court dated January 22nd, 1996, provides, among other things,
that Mr. Rayhart would provide Terri L. Price with temporary
custody of their daughter, Stephanie, every Wednesday from 8:30
a.m. until 4:15 p.m.
A petition has been filed with this Court
alleging that Mr. Rayhart has failed to comply with this order
in that on Wednesday, March 20th, 1996, and on Wednesday, March
27th, 1996, he did not comply with this order, one time
resulting in the Carlisle Police having to take him into
custody, and the other one it was not until later in the morning
that the mother was able to obtain custody.
Mr. Rayhart has admitted those particular facts,
and that he did not deliver custody of Stephanie as he was
supposed to have done. Therefore, the Court
adjudicates him in contempt of court for failing to comply
with the directed order for Stephanie on the two dates alleged.
His testimony was that he forgot. I'm not so
sure if that's truthful or not, but, in any event, at this time
I will not impose any jail sentence on the finding of contempt,
and because of his limited income, I don't wish to take any of
that money in imposing a fine.
However, I will direct Mr. Rayhnrt that I will
i
~
expect him in the future to comply with this order until it's
changed, and if there are any further violations of the order of
the magnitude that I heard here today, then he will go to jail.
By the Court,
I
"
!-'\>( ../"
i - , ) '- .-./
E. Sheely, P.J.
Harold
Samuel W. Milkes, Esquire
For the Plaintiff
Ccf<l'" r.....:.(<<<., 'fh/71e
. .....,
,,!' v'
Dan Pollock, Esquire
For the Defendant
mal
'..
f-.:
I:~,
t 11 ~
( ~
1.
"
c,'
f.
t,
L.
, .
(;;
" ~
,
i..... ..,
.
. .
1
.
~;t",8
~j~!:::
~ ~:1l~
>oc-
r" W.C:=
..... ~ 1-:1:
~~"'~
~<:lic3
Q
,
,
AND NOW this
COURT ORDER
2 7rHday of .J.J7l'ltGLA
, 1996,
v.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 94-2016 CIVIL TERM ~
94-2158 CIVIL TERM
CUSTODY
TERRI L. PRICE,
plaintiff
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
upon consideration of the resent Petition, it is hereby
ordered and decreed that it is hereby ordered that DIANE G.
RADCLIFF, ESQUIRE, is granted leave to withdrawal as legal
counsel for the Defendant, GARY A. RAYHART.
BY THE COURT:
I P.J.
DIANE C. RADCLIFF
ATTORNEY.AT.LAW
SUB TRINlll.t ROAD
CAMP ItlLL. PA 17011
r
,--_'.J. .--' ,,,.'
[ a-~~<..I'; ";:;"1 .-~~'-.
.1 ,
.
'~
-9 .
~,
e-
n
-
~
'1
~
)='
r" :;-; J"?F'(':~__
-"
..1
("0. .
." - rl ......, ','() ;; 1
:,r) :, -.,1 ,:,"1
.
TERRI L. PRICE,
plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 94-2016 CIVIL TERM
94-2158 CIVIL TERM
v.
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
CUSTODY
PETITION TO WITHDRAWAL AS COUNSEL
N\ A t" c.. '"
AND NOW this 22,.. ~ day of
, 1996,
comes DIANE G. RADCLIFF, ESQUIRE, Attorney for the Defendant,
GARY A. RAYHART, and files this petition to Withdrawal as
Counsel and represents that;
1. petitioner is DIANE G. RADCLIFF, ESQUIRE, an
Attorney licensed to practice in the State of Pennsylvania and
having a principal place of business located at 3448 Trindle
Road, camp Hill~ Pennsylvania 17011.
2. Your respondent is GARY A. RAYHART, an adult
individual residing at James wilson Safe Harbor House, 102
West High Street, Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 and is the
Defendant in the above captioned matter.
3. The above captioned matter is a custody action
instituted by the Plaintiff, TERRI L. PRICE, pertaining to
custody of the minor child, STEPHANIE SEA RAYHART, born August
27, 1991.
4. Respondent was referred to the Petitioner for
DIANE C. RADCLIFF
ATTORNEY.AT-LAW
SU8 TRINIII.[ ROAn
CAMP 11I1.1.. PA 17011
purposes of representing him in the above captioned matter by
Legal Services, Inc., on a pro bono basis, November, 1995.
. '
5. Your petitioner first met with your Respondent for
purposes of engaging in said representation in early December,
1995 and thereafter proceeded with the representation of your
Respondent, including the attendance at a custody conciliation
conference on January 22, 1996.
6. In early March, 1996 your Respondent telephoned your
Petitioner's office and informed your Petitioner's Secretary
that her further legal services and representation were no
longer desired.
7. To the present date your Respondent has not advised
your petitioner of replacement legal counsel nor is your
Petitioner aware that replacement legal counsel has been
retained by your Respondent.
8. The above captioned matter is scheduled for trial on
April 1, 1996 at 10:30 a.m.
9. petitioner has had no contact with your Respondent
since the Respondent advised the petitioner that her services
were no longer desired and is unable to act as the
Respondent's legal counselor adequately represent him in
these proceedings.
Wherefore, your petitioner respectfully requests that
this Honorable Court to enter an order granting your
petitioner leave to withdrawal as legal counsel for the
Respondent in the above captioned matter.
DIANE C. RADCLIFF
ATTORNEY.AT.I.AW
SUS TRINIIU: ROAn
CAMI' 1I1t.1., rA 17011
DIANE C. RADCLIFF
ATTORNEY.AT.LAW
SUfi TRINIJI.E ROAIJ
CAMP IfiLl.. PA 17011
-
, .;..:1!"'m'_f:''''!'''~
.,..--
Respectfully Submitted,
DIANE
3
Cam
(717) 737.0100
I.D. No. 32112
Attorney for Defendant
1"_......."".,."" ....
.' ..
.
.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I am this day serving a true and
correct copy of the foregoing Petition to Withdrawal as
Counsel upon the persons and in the manner indicated below,
which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania
Rule of Civil Procedure, by depositing a copy of the same in
the United States Mail, Shiremanstown, Pennsylvania, with
first-class postage, prepaid, as follows:
Samuel W. Milkes, Esquire
Jacobsen & Milkes
52 East High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013-3085
GAt:. -< A. '\CA.-I hc:v.:,f .
..::A.~ w' \:a:.... .s:...lK. ),..,I."" b~.. {..Ic,v~
LQ'L. ~ \--\..~\o-.. S~ Respectfully Submitted,
~~ y.... '101S .
F, ESQUI E
'ndle Road
Camp Hill, PA 17011
(717) 737 -0100
I.D. No. 32112
Attorney for Defendant
Dated:
March 21, 1996
DIANE C. RADCLIFF
ATTORNEY-AT. LAW
SUB TRINIlt.f. ROAn
('.AMP 1111.1.. PA 17011
'1.
I,
i'
V.
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
.
; NO. 94-2016 CML TERM ""
94-2158 CIVIL TERM
TERRI L. PRICE,
Plaintiff
.
: CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT: RULE TO SHOW CAUSE
, r 11
AND NOW this z. \ day of In'7().-.(..vv-, 1996, a rule is issued upon the
Defendant to show cause why he should not be found in contempt of this Court's prior
Order. This rule is returnable at a hearing to be held on the 1st day of April, 1996,
at 10:80 a.m., in Courtroom No. I, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle,
Pennsylvania. The prior Petition for finding of Contempt, filed by Plaintiff on
November 14, 1995 is also set for this same time and date.
BY THE COURT:
IJ CAJ (C::- r----
I - J
y. F!!_~'~~.CFEC:~
. '-"-';';'
'....'). ~.. ": ....
.: ,J
. .l
u;
'~L,'; ;\;,,,:,:.,_,,:;
....1 I, ..:.I L\,/ w"..:\
r
!
,
s: ~O
"
:.,,;--".:....::;.'
;.-;;-.;:
"'? --..
. "
TERRI L. PRICE,
Plaintiff
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
.
.
: NO. 94-2016 CIVIL TERM
94-2158 CIVIL TERM
.
.
: CUSTODY
PETITION FOR FINDING OF CONTEMPT
COMES NOW, The Plaintiff in the above-referenced action, TERRI L. PRICE,
by and through her attorney, Samuel W. Milkes, Esq., JACOBSEN & MILKES, and
requests of this Court that it enter a Rule upon the Defendant, GARY RAYHART, to
show cause why he should not be found in contempt of the Court's January 22, 1996
Order. In support of this Petition, Plaintiff, TERRI L. PRICE asserts as follows:
1. The Order of January 22, 1996 provides for temporary physical custody of
the child, STEPHANIE RAYHART, every Wednesday from 8:30 a.m. until 4:15 p.m.
2. Since the entry of this Order, on nearly every Wednesday, the Defendant has
been late in transferring physical custody of the child to Mother. The tardiness has
ranged from a few minutes to an hour or more.
3. On March 20, 1996, when the child was not delivered as scheduled, the
Plaintiff made contact with the James Wilson Safe Harbour and with the Carlisle
Police Department in an attempt to determine where the Defendant was residing and
why he hadn't transferred custody. Ultimately, the Plaintiff was contacted by the
Carlisle Police and learned that the child, STEPHANIE RAYHART, was with her
Father at a consignment shop on East Pomfret Street, Carlisle. It was not until 11:00
a.m. on this date that the Plaintiff was able to gain physical custody of the child by the
f.,....'''.''... ,,"'_""''''''!'
Plaintiff going to this consignment shop and retrieving the child, with the assistance
of the police.
4. Despite the above events, on March 27, 1996, the child was again not
delivered to the Plaintiff. Terri Price made contact with the James Wilson Safe
Harbour, the consignment shop where the child had been, and with the Carlisle Police
Department. None of these steps were successful in locating the child or in finding the
father.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff respectfully requests of this Court that it issue a
Rule upon the Defendant to show cause why he should not be found in contempt of the
Court's prior Order of January 22, 1996. The Plaintiff requests this Rule be made
returnable at the custody hearing currently scheduled for April 1, 1996 at 10:30 a.m.
before the Honorable Harold E. Sheely, President Judge.
DATE: 7b-7ftG
Respectfully submitted,
~-~
/~ ~/
/BY: Samuel W. Milkes, Esq.
JACOBSEN & MlLKES
52 E. High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 249-6427
Attorney No. 30130
(
-"' - -
JAN 1 B 1996 ~
,.-:--'-
c
c
...
TERRI L. PRICE,
PlaintiU
:IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v
:
:NO. 2016 - CIVIL - 1994
:NO. 2158 - CIVIL - 1994
:
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
: CIVIL ACTION - CUSTODY
COURT ORDER
AND NOW, this .J,r day of d.._.UL'\M , 1996, upon consideration
of the attached Custody COII;;.iTI~ion Report, it is ordered and
directed as follows:
1.
. "
2.
A Hearing is scheduled in Courtroom No. ~.o! the Cumberland
County courthouse on the ~ day of ~,O , 1996, at
IO:~O A,M., at which time testimony will be taken in the
above case. At this Hearing, the Court will entertain
testimony on the Mother's Petition for Contempt filed against
the Father and also the Mother's Petition to Modify the
Existing Custody Order. Mother shall proceed initially with
testimony. Counsel for the parties shall file with the
Court and opposing Counsel a Memorandum setting forth the
history of custody in this case, the issues currently before
the Court, each party's respective position on these issues,
a list of witnesses that will be called to testify at the
Hearing along with a summary of the anticipated testimony of
each witness. This Memorandum shall be filed at least ten
days prior to the Hearing date.
pending further Order of this Court, this Court's prior Order
of December 14, 1994, shall remain in effect with the
understanding that Mother shall continue to enjoy temporary
physical custody as follows:
A. On alternating weekends from Friday at 6 P.M. until
Sunday at 6 P.M.
B. Every Wednesday from 8:30 A.M. until 4:15 P.M.
3. The alternating weekends for the Mother shall start the
weekend of January 19, 1996.
BY THE COURT,
-'5l~~.~'
Jiidge Harold E. Sheelyf P.J.
cc: Samuel W. Milkes, Esquire
Diane G. Radcliff, Esquire
. )..
I hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing 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.
Dated: jJflf1/~0
1
I ,
/Mt'll; ij~)
TERRI L. p~
" .,' ..~.t~.,
, ,.'" 1 -
. ,I' Z' i J-j';
.j ,.,;,' I:' " :1 , "
Jill!l'- ".~,
:,,"f:,l";"-' .....t
r:\'~~ .~';:'
, ~~ . ' , ' ,
. I ,L ~ I' . . ..
t.:'" " (.' 'I'
, 'I " , ,.'1.',',1 -,,'
1~"t[S-~,('.'1l'.:'?!;
~:.:.i;r$' !..1';~:\ l .'; -,:' :
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: NO. 94-2016 CIVIL TERM
94-2158 CIVIL TERM -"
~ '...:; tl:'(~
" " ..
lffl
TERRI L. PRICE,
Plaintiff
V.
GARY A. RAY HART,
Defendant
: CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT: RULE TO SHOW CAUSE
It
AND NOW this~' ) 'day of i /') '< ~'-" L" ,1996, a rule is issued upon the
Defendant to show cause why he should not be found in contempt of this Court's prior
Order. This rule is returnable at a hearing to be held on the 1st day of April, 1996,
at 10:30 a.m., in Courtroom No.1, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle,
Pennsylvania. The prior Petition for finding of Contempt, med by Plaintiff on
November 14, 1995 is also set for this same time and date.
BY THE COURT:
l!d;
,
\ \
)
--
J
6Il..I9/c..l.1l -I!Lul /.<.JoI ~ 91../-;).011..
.} /J.P/9 /.
I hereby verifY that the statements made in the foregoing 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.
Dated: jJfifll~to
1
rA' I
.. ....
'/A .' ,
M/?It ".. W
TERRI L. PR19E
l.
! ~"
. .~.
~.'
.)
r'.
.-'
f;';.
'.")
I.,.
r"1
.,
.~
..Jl '
<:)0-11
-
0)0
~
--
It)
'.
; .
-,
,
. ,
'1
4
)='
"J
.....,
. ';1~7
"'Fl
, .;J
;~}
..J
. -:\ )
.)"1
I
::j
"',
:-?
.,.
'~.J
'.
r\..
c..'l
. 1 .. ' ' . lit ~..~"1~.
'\' -,' ::'t<.; .~~ .
'J:~ 'j f I ~ ":. <
'~""'.'~"
. ['.-;.'1.....,
'f' :'." ,',
~. ","
.;" -
,,::-,1. , 'J, I "" .f'"
I ~1. ,\ , " \" . ..
$'....:..: '. I _ .: '1,;#:;':1.,",
mIW!i'.j;fY~'~.;:
'_~ . ' ",f .,:".(1,11:;"
'~",. ,~ ..,.
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: NO. 94-2016 CIVIL TERM
94-2158 CIVIL TERM ;'
I ..:,/',.. ~i-', J)~
f.i
TERRI L. PRICE,
Plaintiff
V.
GARY A. RAY HART,
Defendant
: CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT: RULE TO SHOW CAUSE
I'
AND NOW this~' ) 'day of i /') ',~'. t. Iv,' ,l996, a rule is issued upon the
Defendant to show cause why he should not be found in contempt of this Court's prior
Order. This rule is returnable at a hearing to be held on the 1st day of April, 1996,
at 10:30 a.m., in Courtroom No. l, Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle,
Pennsylvania. The prior Petition for finding of Contempt, med by Plaintitl' on
November l4, 1995 is also set for this same time and date.
BY THE COURT:
Ijl
j~ (d i
I
\ \
)
--
J
OU,.I9'U.ll-f?kl I-UI'IL CjlJy."J.olb
.l/JP/9t.
, GARY A. RAYHART
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERlAND COUNrY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs.
94-2158 CIVIL TERM
94-2016 CIVIL TERM
TERRI PRICE
ORDER
AND NOW, this
Z<I"
day of May, 1994, following conference with counsel, the
provisions of the temporary custody order entered by our court on May 5, 1994, is temporarily
suspended. Counsel are directed to contact the chambers of the Honorable Harold E. Sheely,
President Judge, at the beginning of business on Monday, May 23, 1994, for the purpose of
arguing their respective positions with respect to a temporary custody order pending conciliation
conference and/or trial by the court.
BY THE COURT,
David R. Breschi, Esquire
For the Plaintiff
IL
Joan Carey, Esquire
For the Defendant
:r1m
GARY A. RAYHART
IN'IHE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs.
94-2158 CIVIL TERM
94-2016 CIVIL TERM
TERRI PRICE
ORDER
AND NOW, this
Z<I"
day of May, 1994, following conference with counsel, the
provisions of the temporary custody order entered by our court on May 5, 1994, is temporarily
suspended Counsel are directed to contact the chambers of the Honorable Harold E. Sheely,
President Judge, at the beginning of business on Monday, May 23, 1994, for the purpose of
arguing their respective positions with respect to a temporary custody order pending conciliation
conference and/or trial by the court.
BY'IHE COURT,
David R. Breschi, Esquire
For the Plaintiff
IL
Joan Carey, Esquire
For the Defendant
:rlm
David R. Breschi, Esquire
For the Plaintiff
/L
GARY A. RAYHART
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
vs.
94-2158 CIVIL TERM ,/
94-2016 CIVIL TERM
TERRI PRICE
ORDER
AND NOW, this
2.<.1"
day of May, 1994, following conference with counsel, the
provisions of the temporary custody order entered by our court on May 5, 1994, is temporarily
suspended. Counsel are directed to contact the chambers of the Honorable Harold E. Sheely,
President Judge, at the beginning of business on Monday, May 23, 1994, for the purpose of
arguing their respective positions with respect to a temporary custody order pending conciliation
conference and/or trial by the court.
BY THE COURT,
Joan Carey, Esquire
For the Defendant
:rlm
..''''' ---0-."-'
.....
en
~>-
::c:
C>-
!"Q
""
"l
"', -
'iJ~:.'~:t
,: (2:-,
.
',';
~ v nl.l
-
...
x:
l
I
"
"
.;,,i
'$
"iI
"Iii
I.;
.,:,
~,
~i
,w.
WI DO HI!AI!IIY CeRTIFY THAT
THI! WlTHIN II A TRUI AND COR.
RECT COpy OF THe: ORIQINAL
FILED IN na ACTION
IV
t.A.....nHlCfS
I
MANCKE. WAG~ER. H~RSHEY & TULLY CL "-
MAY 2 0 1994
AnOAHEV
Ii>
w ...J ~ 0
~~H
~~qjP
~ui~~~
~~J:;m
U en I't a:
Za:~~
<(WhT
~J:
. .
:&, AN ""I' NOT"U '0 no.
.. WfIll""', fIlll"OfilIl to II.'
:"~:-r.I"11' I", 0"" '1IlO"
IIlIMCI ...N(W 0fIl ... AOOUlII'
-,. fNftND AG,Udl 'ou
"~mw.ifi-
Defendant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 94 - 2158 CIVIL TERM
NO. 94 - 2016 CIVIL TERM
IN CUSTODY
GARY A. RAYHART,
plaintiff
v.
TERRI PRICE,
AND NOW, this
ORDER
day of May, 1994, upon consideration of
the petition for Special Relief, custody of the parties child shall
remain with the father and no unsupervised visitations with the
mother shall take place pending an Order from the custody
conciliation conference scheduled for Friday, June 3, 1994.
BY THE COURT:
J.
TERRI PRICE,
Defendant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 94 - 2158 CIVIL TERM
NO. 94 - 2016 CIVIL TERM
IN CUSTODY
GARY A. RAYHART,
plaintiff
v.
PBTITION ~OR SPBCIAL RBLIB~
AND NOW, comes the Petitioner, by and through his attorneys,
MANCKE, WAGNER, HERSHEY & TULLY, who brings this Petition for
Special Relief pursuant to Title 42 51915.13 and represents the
following:
1. The Petitioner Gary A. Rayhart resides at 10710 Elk
Drive, Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania County, Virginia.
2. The Respondent, Terri L. Price, hereinafter referred to
as the "mother" resides at 5 North Pitt street, Carlisle,
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
3. The parties are the parents of Stephanie Bea Rayhart,
hereinafter referred to as the "child."
4. On or about April 26, 1994 the Petitioner filed a
Complaint for Custody in the above captioned matter with a
conciliation conference scheduled for Thursday, May 19, 1994.
5. On or about April 22, 1994 the mother filed a Complaint
for Custody with a conciliation conference scheduled for June 3,
1994.
6. On May 18, 1994, the Petitioner's attorney was informed
that the conciliation conference scheduled for May 19, 1994 had
been rescheduled and the conciliation conference for both actions
would be held June 3, 1994.
7. On May 18, 1994, Petitioner's attorney first discovered
the existence of an Order for Temporary CUstody had been filed and
signed by the Honorable Harold E. Sheeley, President Judge. A copy
of this Order and Petition for Special Relief is attached hereto as
Petitioner's Exhibit "1.".
8. The Petitioner believes and therefore asserts that the
issuance of the temporary custody order giving the mother
unsupervised visitation is not in the best interest of the child
because it places the child's health and safety at risk for the
following reasons:
a. The child's mother lived with the child, the
child's deceased sister (stacy Rayhart), and
Anthony Winger at 16 East King st. Shippensburg,
Pennsylvania from October, 1993 until April 9,
1994.
b. On or about April 9, 1994, while the mother of the
child had primary residential custody of both the
child and stacy Rayhart and had responsibility for
the care and welfare of both the child and stacy
Rayhart, stacy Rayhart was found dead at 16 East
King street and the child, Stephanie Bea Rayhart,
2
was found severely beaten and was taken to Carlisle
Hospital emergency room.
c. The mother and her boyfriend, Anthony Winger are
under criminal investigation regarding stacy
Rayhart's death.
d. Neither Anthony Winger nor the mother have been
taken into custody and both are currently free.
e. Placing the child in the mother's custody
unsupervised, in light of what occurred in April,
1994, would place the child's health and safety at
risk unnecessarily.
WHEREFORE, the Petitioner respectfully requests this Court to
suspend the May 5, 1994 temporary custody order until after the
custody conciliation conference scheduled for Friday, June 3, 1994,
at which time evidence may be presented to the custody conciliator
as to the possible health and safety risks involved with giving the
mother unsupervised custody visitation of stephanie ~ea Rayhart.
Respectfully submitted,
MANCRE, WAGNER, HERSHEY & TULLY
By r;)-f ;t 0C
DAVID R. BRESCHI, ESQUIRE
Attorney ID # 59001
2233 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110
717/234-7051
Attorneys for Petitioner
Oate, /I; 0, r fry
3
Date:
Ap"1(j, my
VBRII'ICATIOII
The undersigned, David R. Breschi, hereby verifies and states
that:
1. He is the attorney for Gary Rayhart, Petitioner.
2. He is authorized to make this verification on his behalf.
3. This verification is made by counsel pursuant to Pa.R.C.P.
No. Rule 1024(c).
4. The statements set forth in the foregoing Petition for
special Relief are true and correct to the best of his knowledge,
information and belief.
5. He is aware that false statements herein are made subject
to the penalties of 18 Pa. c.s. 54904, relating to unsworn
falsification to authorities.
.
1
L.EG"'L. SERVl CES.' 1 HC.
2438026
P.02
"
~
Terri L. pric.,
plaintiff
rN ~HE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
NO. 94 - $,O/fb
CIVIL TERM
Gary A. Rayhart,
Defendant
CUS~OD,{
TEMPORARY CUSTODY ORDER
AND NOW, this -tr:!:- day of fh"7 ' 1994, upon
consideration of the Petition for Special Relief, custody of the
parties' child, Stephanie Bea Rayhart, will be according to the
fOllowing schedul.: The parties will alternate custody every two
Mt>;/. .2J
weeks beginning with the mother having custody on Ap~~l 23, 1994.
The parties will share transportation, transferring custodY at an
agre.d upon half-way point between Virginia and Pennsylvania.
This order shall remain in effect pending further order of
Court. {.l (!k~1,d1 COIVtJ.:'/Pt,'DtJ (!Aur~It...,4I<1.c. h~s bee,., se.f Po.~
r~i""'1 I ,Jl.I.Nc:. .~. J'1q'i, By the Court,
Is/
I I
~e~
, J.
TRue COpy FROM RECORD
In T~imony "'n~n>Qf. I nIY.1I 1M,) ~'\t my t.and
and !;le.'SMIIl! ~'lld I;OI.lr. at !;JJ!it;k1, PI.
Tilla~, t};-~ !1-:t~, : ' 1~
Prothonotary
r-:"'--'''''''''';'''''.c,:~",~~
.'
I.ECAI. SERV ICES. I toIC.
. P.BB
2438026
PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF
The petitioner by and through her attorney, Joan Carey,
Legal services, Inc., represents the following:
1. The plaintiff, Terri L. Price, hereinafter referred to
as the mother, resides at 16 East King street (Apt. 7),
Shippensburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17257.
2. The defendant, Gary A. Rayhart, hereinafter referred to
as the father, resides at 10710 Elk Drive, Fredricksburg,
spotsylvania County, Virginia 22407.
3. The parties are the parents of Stephanie Bea Rayhart.
4. on
, 1994 a Complaint for custody was filed
in the above-captioned matter by the mother. A conciliation
conference is scheduled for
, 1994, at
.m. before
,
5. ~he mother has been the primary caretaker of the child,
Stephanie Bea Rayhart, since her birth, except for a period of
approximately one month, from mid-September 1993 until mid-
October 1993, when the child visited the father.
6. Cumberland county Children and Youth Services is
currently conducting an investigation of the mother's former
#
boyfriend's treatment ot the child; however, Cumberland county
Children and 10uth services has no open case against the mother
and has expressed no intention to keep the child from the custody
of the mother.
7. On April 8, 1994 the tather took the child from the
mother'. custody, under the guise of taking the child temporarily
to get the child something to eat.
a. Between April a, 1994 and April 12, 1994 the father
would not re~ease the child to the mother despite the mother's
requests. The father told the mother that he did not want the
child around the mother.
9. On April 13, 1994, the father took the child to Virginia
where the child has remained to present.
10. Since April 9, 1994 the mother has had no contact with
the child.
WHEREFORE, the plaintiff requests that this court enter a
Temporary Order granting the parties custody of the child on an
alternating two week schedule with the mother having custody
beginning on April 24, 1994, until further Order ot Court.
Respectfully submitted,
( ,.' -.' ,
,/....~'.v~_~_/
:.... Joan Carey .1
Attorney for Plaintiff
LEGAL SERVICES, INC.
a Irvine Row
carlisle, pa 17013
(717) 243-9400
..
. .'
~EGA~ SERVICES. IHC.
24:5e026
p.e9
.
.'
"
The above-named Plaintiff, Terri Price, verifies that tho
statements made in the above Petition for Special Relief are true
and correct. Plaintiff understands that false statoments herein
are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pe. C.S. 64904, relating
Date:
Co/ / / "3 / ) (I
aut horit i es. "
,.,. ,
,.,.-- 'I \'. \
/~ 11, \,J.. f' C' '
; ." f./l .. ,~ .JO.
Terri Price, Plainti1'
Ii
to unsworn falsification to
.: TO . ,~ "'~r?<i~~~{:~,
, YOU />11II. - NOT1flIO TO m .."I :,,' "J~""",;
':' . WRlnlN RllPONII TO T' :~l.'/>~~
1Na0ll0 . ." . --c,-,,-':'>:'lcY-{~i"-'~""':"_" ."
wnitlN TWINTY 1201 D..... =e "'::~,\ "':'i,"''''
IIfMC1 HIRlOfI, OIL A ....'UIDO , ~;,'J:~,~:,;-I~:~i~t--;
MAV.1HTIRIIl ACIAINlIf YOU >,'"''
"', . "~"-~-"-"'"
IV ", ""'j-F.".'::,
AnoItt.-v. '-,',,-, ;+->~
~:~:~'~l'::;}~~R
.~ .. , .. ,,~~>fi.:~-;'J.
7-':':~~i;\~;:'/-f:~~{'i~~\:t:.\N~,;~~:,',-:.,,;_:_ "~, ,': . ',' '_~~_ _, -, ,_'; ',,:_,,::;;
)~~"i.'!i~M' )i.v ,2 O:1994'.l\." ~.';:
,-",,-,,<-,__~t-'~,_::;,_'i_, __,_,~""i~"';;
i?~i~Xi, ~> '~:;~_ ! "l'~1: Xi> 1 : ;,- ,_!:,';: :,-', ~l., it '_ :ie">:;: t: Hf\.1L
~DO.!;IIIII\VClI' 'flffi' ";1B' . f'",'
':WI 11l1i!.arr ':T on;: .'#';
I.' _ ~.; '-hTNI -U;:,. NO .'i'-'
iHTIlII' ~~J;jl- "';':' ,.':'::,'
',<<i. >j',~(\l\;'" - ',' .., ,;;;,,-.iiff~ 'i:~:r"-.i-;'~:r"'--'~
1Y.~~~::;~~~~'~&~it,~~;";~,
,. -,- -';-/-,'i'-
Defendant
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
GARY A. RAYHART,
Plaintiff
.
.
v.
: NO. 94 - 2158 CIVIL TERM
: NO. 94 - 2016 CIVIL TERM
TERRI PRICE,
:
:
IN CUSTODY
AND NOW, this
ORDER
day of May, 1994, upon consideration of
the Petition for Special Relief, custody of the parties child shall
remain with the father and no unsupervised visitations with the
mother shall take place pending an Order from the custody
conciliation conference scheduled for Friday, June 3, 1994.
BY THE COURT:
J.
Defendant
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 94 - 2158 CIVIL TERM
NO. 94 - 2016 CIVIL TEKM
IN CUSTODY
GARY A. RAYHART,
Plaintiff
v.
TERRI PRICE,
PBTITIOH POR SPBCIAL RBLIBP
AND NOW, comes the Petitioner, by and through his attorneys,
MANCKE, WAGNER, HERSHEY & TULLY, who brings this Petition for
special Relief pursuant to Title 42 51915.13 and represents the
following:
1. The Petitioner Gary A. Rayhart resides at 10710 Elk
Drive, Fredericksburg, Spotsylvania County, Virginia.
2. The Respondent, Terri L. Price, hereinafter referred to
as the "mother" resides at 5 North pitt Street, Carlisle,
Cumberland County, Pennsylvania.
3. The parties are the parents of Stephanie Bea Rayhart,
hereinafter referred to as the "child."
4. On or about April 26, 1994 the Petitioner filed a
Complaint -for CUstody in the above captioned matter with a
conciliation conference scheduled for Thursday, May 19, 1994.
5. On or about April 22, 1994 the mother filed a Complaint
for Custody with a conciliation conference scheduled for June 3,
1994.
6. On May 18, 1994, the Petitioner's attorney was informed
that the conciliation conference scheduled for May 19, 1994 had
2
been rescheduled and the conciliation conference for both actions
would be held June 3, 1994.
7. On May 18, 1994, Petitioner's attorney first discovered
the existence of an Order for Temporary CUstody had been filed and
siqned by the Honorable Harold E. Sheeley, President Judqe. A copy
of this Order and Petition for special Relief is attached hereto as
Petitioner's Exhibit "1".
8. The Petitioner believes and therefore asserts that the
issuance of the temporary custody order qivinq the mother
unsupervised visitation is not in the best interest of the child
because it places the child's health and safety at risk for the
followinq reasons:
a. The child's mother lived with the child, the
child's deceased sister (Stacy Rayhart), and
Anthony Winqer at 16 East Kinq st. Shippensburq,
Pennsylvania from October, 1993 until April 9,
1994.
b. On or about April 9, 1994, while the mother of the
child had primary residential custody of both the
child and Stacy Rayhart and had responsibility for
the care and welfare of both the child and Stacy
Rayhart, stacy Rayhart was found dead at 16 East
Kinq Street and the child, Stephanie Bea Rayhart,
was found severely beaten and was taken to Carlisle
Hospital emergency room.
c. The mother and her boyfriend, Anthony winger are
under criminal investigation regarding stacy
Rayhart's death.
d. Neither Anthony Winger nor the mother have been
taken into custody and both are currently free.
e. Placing the child in the mother's custody
unsupervised, in light of what occurred in April,
1994, would place the child's health and safety at
risk unnecessarily.
WHEREFORE, the Petitioner respectfully requests this Court to
suspend the May 5, 1994 temporary custody order until after the
custody conciliation conference scheduled for Friday, June 3, 1994,
at which time evidence may be presented to the custody conciliator
as to the possible health and safety risks involved with giving the
mother unsupervised custody visitation of stephanie Bea Rayhart.
Respectfully submitted,
MANCKE, WAGNER, HERSHEY & TULLY
By r;H It &C
DAVID R. BRESCHI, ESQUIRE
Attorney ID # 59001
2233 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110
717/234-7051
Attorneys for Petitioner
Date, ~ O( r fV{
3
VERIJ'ICATIOH
The undersigned, David R. Breschi, hereby verifies and states
that:
1. He is the attorney for Gary Rayhart, Petitioner.
2. He is authorized to make this verification on his behalf.
3. This verification is made by counsel pursuant to Pa.R.C.P.
No. Rule 1024(c).
4. The statements set forth in the foregoing Petition for
special Relief are true and correct to the best of his knowledge,
information and belief.
5. He is aware that false statements herein are made subject
to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. 54904, relating to unsworn
falsification to authorities.
Date:
!t1Jur/I, rrr7
(II
..
*
L.ECN. SERVICES, IHC.
2438"'26
P.02
..
Terri L. price,
Plaintitt
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
.
.
.
.
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
Gary A. Rayhart,
DetendAnt
: NO. 94 - $.Olft)
CUSTODY
CIVIL TERM
TEMPORARY CUSTODY ORDER
AND NOW, this ~-~ day ot 1h"7 ' 1994, upon
consideration of the Petition for Special Relief, custody at the
parties' child, Stephanie Bea Rayhart, will be according to the
tollowing schedule: The parties will alternate custody every two
mny OJ}
weeks beginning with the mother having custody on Ap~!l 23, 1994.
The parties will share transportation, transferring custody at an
agr.ed upon halt-way point between Virginia and Pennsylvania.
This order shall remain in etfect pending further order of
Court. A C!...~i"lr CONC,://"t,'OAJ (!AJJI1~~IV<1.e. hkS beeN .s..t Po.'
F'~iJ."'1 ,.JIA.NG .~. }'}q'l. By the Court,
Isl
I ,
~g~
, J.
. ,
I I
I
I
i
I
TRue COPY FROM RECORD
In T~n)' wlv.trwf. I n~fI 1M,) ~ my hoalld
and \;le.'saal of s.'!Id (~Otlrt at w/!it;lo, PI.
TiM~ ~Fy;' Q' ~.'~ 1~ '
Protnonotlry
<>-,'-
"
l..EGAl.. SERV ICES. I HC.
24~e1il26
p.ee
Terri L. Price,
Pla!ntiU
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
I
.
.
v.
CIVIL TERM
.
.
NO.
94 -
Gary A. Rayhart,
Defendant
: CUSTODY
PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF
The petitioner by and through her attorney, Joan Carey,
Legal Services, Inc., represents the following:
1. The plaintiff, Terri L. Price, hereinafter referred to
as the mother, resides at 16 East King street (Apt. 7),
Shippensburq, cumberland county, pennsylvania 17257.
2. The defendant, Gary A. Rayhart, hereinafter referred to
as the father, resides at 10710 Elk Drive, Fredricksburq,
spotsylvania county, Virginia 22407.
3. The parties are the parants of stephanie Bea Rayhart.
4. on
, 1994 a complaint for custody waS filed
in the above-captioned matter by the mother. A conciliation
conference is scheduled for
, 1994, at
.m. before
,
5. The mother has been the primary caretaker of the child,
stephanie Bea Rayhart, since her birth, except for a period of
approximatelY one month, from mid-september 1993 until mid-
October 1993, when the child visited the father.
6. cumberland county Children and Youth services is
currently conducting an investigation of the mother'S former
..
,
boyfriend's treatment of the chila; however, Cumberland county
Children and Youth services has no open case against the mother
and has expressed no intention to keep the child from the custody
of the mother.
7. On April 8, 1994 the father took the chila from the
mother's custody, unaer the guise of taking the child temporarily
to get the chila something to eat.
8. Between April 8, 1994 and April 12, 1994 the father
would not release the child to the mother despite the mother's
requests. The father told the mother that he did not want the
child around the mother.
9. On April 13, 1994, the father took the child to Virginia
where the child has remained to present.
10. since April 9, 1994 the mother has had no contact with
the child.
WHEREFORE, the plaintiff requests that this court enter a
Temporary Order granting the parties custody of the child on an
alternating two week schedule with the mother having custody
beginning on April 24, 1994, until further Order of Court.
Respectfully submitted,
( /'-,
,/--~'~ ~-~",-,,/'
:... Joan Carey /1
Attorney for plaintiff
LEGAL SERVICES, INC.
a Irvine Row
Carlisle, pa 17013
(717) 243-9400
~
L.ECAL. SERY 1 CES. 1 HC.
243e"26
,
. .
The above-named Plaintiff, Terri Price, verifies that the
statements made in the above Petition for Special Relief are true
and correct. Plaintiff understands that false statements herein
are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. U4904, relating
to unsworn falsification to
authorities. "
\
.--....-", t I \
.~</ /1, \ ../ " A '
Y (" ," I~.~t >~. .S'~\. .;..
Terri Price, Plainti11
Ii
Date:
(./ //3/')(1
'f
,
t
, i
GARY A. RAYHART
IN TIlE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
I
1
vs.
94-2158 CIVIL TERM
94-2016 CIVIL TERM .,....
TERRI PRICE
ORDER
AND NOW, this
Zf,)"
day of May. 1994, following conference with counsel, the
provisions of the temporary custody order entered by our court on May 5,1994, is temporarily
suspended. Counsel are directed to contact the chambers of lhe Honorable Harold E. Sheely,
President Judge, at the beginning of business on Monday, May 23, 1994, for the purpose of
arguing their respective positions with respect to a temporary custody order pending conciliation
conference and/or trial by the court.
BY TIlE COURT,
David R. Breschi. Esquire
For the Plaintiff
/L
Joan Carey, Esquire
For the Defendant
:rlm
~.
~....
"::1-
:;n
~
''''
"J
".J
S>
>~,
'-
-,
_i.:'
TERRI L. PRICE, . IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
.
Plaintiff : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
. CIVIL ACTION - LAW
.
V .
.
.
.
GARY A. RAYHART, . 94-2016 CIVIL
.
Defendant .
.
GARY A. RAYHART,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
V
TERRI L. PRICE,
Defendant
94-2158 CIVIL vr
.
.
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, May 23, 1994, the temporary order which I
signed on May 5, 1994, is VACATED and set aside. The father
shall have temporary custody of Stephanie until the Conciliation
Conference which has been set for Friday, June 3, 1994.
The reason for changing the prior order is that the
court has been made aware of the fact that on April 9, 1994,
while the mother had primary custody of Stephanie and her twin
sister Stacy, that Stacy was found dead in the apartment where
the mother and her boyfriend lived. I have been informed that
the investigation into the death of Stacy involves the mother's
boyfriend. Until this fact has been established, I do not
believe the mother should have any type of custody of Stephanie.
.
..
94-2016 CIVIL; 94-2158 CIVIL
I would suggest very strongly that the parties have the
investigating police officer and a representative from Children
and Youth Services present at the conciliation conference so that
the facts as to whom was responsible for the death of Stacy can
be shown to the custody conciliator.
By the Court,
n,jFff \/:
Jg~Jheely:Q~ v
Joan Carey, Esquire
Legal Services for Ms. Price
David R. Breschi, Esquire
For Mr. Rayhart
Hubert x. Gilroy, Esquire
Custody Conciliator
:pbf
.. ,,'
....,\,
, '
"'.~: 'J:..
1.~,\ .".
'~i\ .i. .'
, !'~;
",F
~b' V.', Z(I \,
H I~I~
..,
!
,
TERRI L. PRICE, z IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF :
Plaintiff . CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA It
.
. CIVIL ACTION - LAW I:
.
V z "
z r
GARY A. RAYBART, . 94-2016 CIVIL V
.
Defendant z
GARY A. RAY BART ,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
V
TERRI L. PRICE,
Defendant
94-2158 CIVIL
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, May 23, 1994, the temporary order which I
signed on May 5, 1994, is VACATED and set aside. The father
shall have temporary custody of Stephanie until the Conciliation
Conference which has been set for Friday, June 3, 1994.
The reason for changing the prior order is that the
court has been made aware of the fact that on April 9, 1994,
while the mother had primary custody of Stephanie and her twin
sister Stacy, that Stacy was found dead in the apartment where
the mother and her boyfriend lived. I have been informed that
the investigation into the death of Stacy involves the mother's
boyfriend. Until this fact has been established, I do not
believe the mother should have any type of custody of Stephanie.
~~
"
..
94-2016 CIVIL; 94-2158 CIVIL
I would suggest very strongly that the parties have the
investigating police officer and a representative from Children
and Youth Services present at the conciliation conference BO that
the facts as to whom was responsible for the death of Stacy can
be shown to the custody conciliator.
By the Court,
Jdd~&:v::::
Joan Carey, Esquire
Legal Services for Ms. Price
David R. Breschi, Esquire
For Mr. Rayhart
Hubert x. Gilroy, Esquire
Custody Conciliator
:pbf
oU'
\.1\",
IIG. \" 11' h
I....
,
Terri L. price,
Plaintiff .
.
.
.
.
.
v. :
.
.
.
.
Gary A. Rayhart, .
.
Defendant .
.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERlAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO.
94 -
;).O/iJl
CIVIL TERM
CUSTODY
TEMPO~RY CUSTODY ORDER
"'t.11
AND NOW, this 5 day of Yl~'~(1 , 1994, upon
consideration of the Petition for Special elief, custody of the
parties' child, Stephanie Bea Rayhart, will be according to the
following schedule: The parties will alternate custody every two
~~A ;'
weeks beginning with the mother having custody on . 3, 1994.
The parties will share transportation, transferring custody at an
agreed upon half-way point between Virginia and Pennsylvania.
This order shall remain in effect pending further order of
,'\ ( L' .:, T L (i '-I <:" h ( '-~ct tIt' ,-I (' ,;-.."-'t--e'-"-<:..-,- ft (-'-'t'
Court. - -..--:J C."- ,jC\ LI +-~ J, /'( q L( .
I -L"'-..!' "'.R..--\ \-<- 'J
,v By the Court,
IJCL'\h( r= .[\~
, J.
HAY J
3 137 PH '9~
oj;- ~ lGt:
':- . ,hJ!i"..I: ,,,y
f'!.)' ,;: , .. I"' liT
-" ": F h':, ; ;' "_: :~t.,,,,
~.'J,;
PETITION FOR SPECIAL RELIEF
The petitioner by and through her attorney, Joan Carey,
Legal services, Inc., represents the following:
1. The plaintiff, Terri L. Price, hereinafter referred to
as the mother, resides at 16 East King street (Apt. 7),
Shippensburg, Cumberland county, Pennsylvania 17257.
2. The defendant, Gary A. Rayhart, hereinafter referred to
as the father, resides at 10710 Elk Drive, Fredricksburg,
Spotsylvania County, Virginia 22407.
3. The parties are the parents of stephanie Bea Rayhart.
4. On
, 1994 a Complaint for custody was filed
in the above-captioned matter by the mother. A conciliation
conference is scheduled for
, 1994, at
.m. before
5. The mother has been the primary caretaker of the child,
Stephanie Bea Rayhart, since her birth, except for a period of
approximately one month, from mid-September 1993 until mid-
October 1993, when the child visited the father.
6. Cumberland County Children and Youth Services is
currently conducting an investigation of the mother's former
~~
(, ,J
, Joan Carey
Attorney for Plaintiff
LEGAL SERVICES, INC.
a Irvine Row
Carlisle, pa 17013
(717) 243-9400
boyfriend's treatment of the child; however, Cumberland County
Children and Youth Services has no open case against the mother
and has expressed no intention to keep the child from the custody
of the mother.
7. On April a, 1994 the father took the child from the
mother's custody, under the guise of taking the child temporarily
to get the child something to eat.
a. Between April a, 1994 and April 12, 1994 the father
would not release the child to the mother despite the mother's
requests. The father told the mother that he did not want the
child around the mother.
9. On April 13, 1994, the father took the child to Virginia
where the child has remained to present.
10. Since April 9, 1994 the mother has had no contact with
the child.
WHEREFORE, the plaintiff requests that this court enter a
Temporary Order granting the parties custody of the child on an
alternating two week schedule with the mother having custody
beginning on April 24, 1994, until further Order of Court.
Respectfully submitted,
Date:
1../ /13/)(/
,o'ho,"','. ~
~4<" (it ~ "
Terri Price, Plai71iTf
The above-named Plaintiff, Terri Price, verifies that the
statements made in the above Petition for Special Relief are true
and correct. Plaintiff understands that false statements herein
are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. 64904, relating
to unsworn falsification to
, ,d LEGAL SEflVICES, iiI/C.
".' ' 8 IRVINE ROW
.;',~ARUSLe, PENNSYLVANIA 17013
17171 243.9400
Fe. 17171243-802&
"
'<'!.r"%;"\
~ \j'J~ i ~_ . ",.: .
, ..~_:If~:~:2;,'/:{:...
TERRI L. PRICE.
I N TilE COlIIff' Of' l'O~,IMON 1'1.I',\S Of
1'\l~,lilf'I~1 Nill ('O!!:,T\', I'ENNS\1,V,\NIA
Plaintiff
1'.
:,0. II,I-201r. ,'IVII TElIM
:\0, 'J4-2151l (' /VII. TERM .......-
GARY A, RAYIINrr.
Defendant
('IIST(I[lY
ANIl NO\\',
lid
this LI."-..- da)'
or Ill't'elllhl'r. 1')1)4, upon clIn"iderllt ion of the
rW:i1l!fly. !lHJll':t1
Consent /\greellll'nt, thl' following ,'u,.tpdy Onler is "lItered regilrdill", the parties'
chi Id, Stephllnie /I..,. 11',yllilll,
I. The 1'1111 it'S shill I Shilll.' "'t,,.1 l'u'.lod'",
2. The filther sh:oIl IW"l' prill,,,r)' ph:,...;;I.'i11 ,,,.,tlldy.
3. The lIIotl\l'r ,hall han' 1""lial ell,stcdy Ill' the child e,'ery other
weekend on Sntunlay from 11:00 11.01. UIII i I 7:00 1'.11I. alld on SUllday from 1):00 a.m.
until 7:001'.11I. cOlIIlII,'ncing with Satullla)'. 1l,'I:,'II,I)(.r 17. 1'J'I4. alld al other times
agreed upon hy tl\l' pari ies for a period of six lIIonths IIl1d 011 thl' concli t ion that
the mother's sister, Margie t;essller. Iwr hrother. nean Pri<:e, or nllother agreed
upon party, is present during Ihe (wriods Ill' t'lIstocly,
4. Tlw fathl'r shal J pnl\'icle I rllllsporlat ion to the mother's home during
the six month (ll'riod Hnd shall relllain in his \'chkle at all t illles during tnmsfer
of custody; the lII"ther and fllther shall shllrl' I ran"portnt illll after six months
provided the mother has ~lll'l'essl'lllly l'IHllpleted the ("'illsI.'I I inl! and the Cllrl i,,/e
YWCA's pH rent i ng pro.!! UIIII i IIC I ud i up s t ,.t.....~~ lIIilfl:t.!!l'lIJelll ami produt'l:s dOCUlllcrtla l i Illl
to pru\'t' Slh.::ccs.sful Cl1mpll'( ion of UIt.' prognulI.
5. The lIIot h...r sha II a II "nd d I'll" Ii; illcohnl ('01111><' I I Ill!! .lilt! sha II t'lImp I....
with fill t'ccommendilt ill"'" ineludirJp f\l'ri'.ldic 1I1 j'h.' t."...! ill',',
fl. Ttu' lIlother shall :tltt nil ~lfld 1'{ll1lplt'!I' tilt, p"'I~'ilt in~' Pf'\),'!rHIII illl.'llIdin!.~
s t rC:::iS mmvlgellit.'n tor fl.: I'l"1 a 1 till' I 'It I' , i ',ll' \ ~.'.l '.\.
9<;- ~01b
7. t\t tilt! end of six 1Il01lth". if the IIInther has succl's',full." cOlllpleted
the counMd ling nnd ('url isle nv!',\ prograllls. and produces doculllentat ion to prove
successfu I cOlllplct ion of the programs. the 1Il0t hl'r "hall I iii Vl' unsupervised periods
of pnrtinl CUSlOd." with thl' child on Illtc'rnating Wel'Kc'ncls 1'1'011I Friclny at 6:00
P,IIl. unt i I Sundu." lit (;:()O 1',11I.. and all." other times liS ilgrc,ed UpOll hy the
pllrties.
8, Tlw pari il's sl11l J I kl'l'P l'aeh 01 h,'r illforllll.'d of Ihl'i I' illlrlresses IIIld
te lephnlle lIUlIlhl' rs.
'I. Thl' flltlll'r ',hall 'U'l IIIOH' oul of a cU ",i Ic' rilllill.', of ('al'l isle without
writtl.'n agrcL'lllcnt of the part. it's or Order Dr \.tllJrl.
10. Thl' fillhl'r illld mollll'l. hy rJllItlJ;,1 d~'rL'ellil'nt. !llilY vary f"utll t!lis
schedule at llny timc' hut the ordl'r shall rel;inill illl~r11'{ L U:l!;! further ()f,ler .If
Court.
11. The IIInthl'r alld 1'111111:1' shill I lIotify thl' other of i1III11L'diclIl carl' thl'
chi IcI receives whi II.' in thllt parellt's care, Fach pnrl'lIt shall noti fy the othl'r
immecliately of lIledical emergenciL's which arist, whi 1(: thc' chi Id is in that
pnrcnt's care,
12. The mother shill I not pc'nni t the chi Id to hI.' ill the presence of Oai I
Placido or her chi Idren during her perinels of part ial custody UlIt i I fUl'lher order
of Court.
13, Neither party shall do or Sll." allY thing which may l'strallge thl' chiltl
frolll the other Jlllrl'lIt. or illjUIl' thL' "pillioll of I Ill' dli Id as [.. tile othl'r pllrellt
or which 11I11)' IIllmpL'r the frL'l' "'", lIaturlll d,'\'[.I"I'lIIl'Ilt Ilf tl,v l'hi Id's lon' or
rcsJll'ct for the 0\ IIl'r JlII ll'lI 1 .
14, r,l'ithl'r party slnll l'''"',lIl1l1: allY : 111.'~'dl drug', "r dllY kind at ,lilY
l illll.:. C'llllSUlllptioll of ~,tJch j.., :t vinlat ion u! llli.... ord.'r. !\\..'itIIL'r party ~i11i1l1
'~l~_~:LL____.j'~ ~---
IIn ro Id F. shee I y, Pres i den t .iUd~(t
conSUllle nlcohol to exel'SS whi Ie lhl' d,j III i' ill ll,eir u,stnlly,
IS. If after sb; IIl111ltk. till' l"lrl it's ,..lIlln\ agl'l't' ,)11 a ',pccific CU',Llllly
schedull'. either party '11/1)' I'l'l it inll I he (\>llll.
Joan Carey
Attorney for Plaintiff
I..ooAI. sl'llV I CI~ , I Nt:.
David R. Breschi
Allorney for Defendant
MANCKE, WAGNEH, \IImSIlEY & 'I1n.I.Y
I'llIillt iff
i~"; 1"111" ('O! 'f(1' or t 'iJ:1:.~ IN 1'1 J..\S or
,'I '\'Hllil ,\:,11 ,'(j[':'d \'. I'I'NNSYLW,'IJ I!\
Tuml L. 1'!Un,.
v.
:';0. ')4- ~o 1 Ci ('[ V 11. Tf',HM
'Ul. ".1-21.~X I'IVII. TEHM
GAHY ",1M YHART ,
Defendant
( 'l!STODY
('(,Jt:-!xt':N'\.' ,Nml':I':MFNT
t./v
This agl'l!l'Ilil'rtl ;''\ l'lIlL'rl'd nn llli'" /11 r1ilY ,)f Ilt'Cl:mhl'r. 1994, h.v the
plaintiff. Terri I. I'ril'l'. "nd Ihl' deh'(IlI"nl. (;11.1' \. I~i\.\'harl. The plaintiff is
fl'l'resented hy .Ioall ('llrl'.I' or 11-:(;,\1 SI'W,]('I'S, ,:,,'.: Ih.' ,kf,'uol"nl is rel'le,;ellted
hy Dllvid R. flresl'hi of :,1.\'1"1'. \\,\(;~I'I~, 1II'I(SllIY ~, '1'1 'I.! \'. Thc part ics C11!rec that
the foJ Jowing may hl' l'lltL'll'd it'; it l'U.;tl)t!y PI'''''r.
1. The' d(.ft.'IHldlll ,tIId plaint irf a1~I"tT In lbi! l'nlry l,j ;trl order providin~
for the following l'u:;h)oI.1' :"l'I't'duh- 1"1 tht" I' ,,'hi hI. :;I"I'I'''lIic lie'.. Hllyharl:
a) The fathcl II i II hd," IH'illi"ry ph.l',,;,',,1 ..u"t,"ly of the chi Id /llld
the parti.." will ',halc Iv;:"I ellsl,,,I,\'.
b) TI\l' lIIother IIi II han' pari ial "lIstod.,' of th..' chi III every olher
weekend nn :5atl.lrllay frolll '):on a.II<. Ullt i I 7:00 p,m. IIml 011 ~Ufld!lY
from 9:00 lI,m. tlllt i I 7:ilO p.m, 'ommelldng willi XalUrda)'. December
17. 1')94, I\lId al "thl'r t ;lIll'S agrel'" tlpun 1>.1' the' parties for it period
of si:o: mOllths and on till' I:olldi l inll thai thl' IHolher'" sisler, Margie
r,essner. !It:r IHOlhl'J'. )lean Price. or HIlOlhl'1' aprt.:ed upon {mrly. is
preSt'lll during tile peri~'(J:." of clJstudy.
c) Till' filth".. wi I J pro\'ide I ":IfI"p"..t1<t iOIl to) ll)(' motlwr's home
dUl'ill~_', llit, ~i\ lIluntli pL'riud and ',\i II n'llIillll in hi~.. \'c....dclc at all
tilllt'... tiut"ing lrdll,,-.ftOI" nf \.-'u...t"dy; till.' mnthl.'r :Inri f:lthcr will share
tr:lI1spol'tat itlll ilfll.'l" ',j'" 'PUll'!)"; prn\i(h..d thl' twdhl'C lIdS SlH:I...L'..;srull,v
('Ol1lpll'I\'11 I'll' ;l!ll'l'l iii't"; CI.tjl;'I.!;;tI', iillli IL. i',rlislv Y\l,'{'t'."s
,-,:~.!"r.n-"..~i!'.:~~_'i.ri~:::}___'~':._ .:..
...,':.... ...::..... :r,~..~_~.:'.~mA....'-l'.;.r:~v:~'l:..".\;:!f4.lJ:.:/.-.~!."U.l:!~?.r_f1Wn~~~
parenting I'rugrlllll illL'ludillg sln""< mil nnl'ClIIl'llI
IIn(l pro(luc""
doculIlcntut ion to prnVt' :-;lIccl'~,sflll complcl ion uf the prograllls.
d) The lIIother IIgJ'ees 10 IIttc'l\l1 dl'u)'. &, IIkohlll cClunselling /lncl
agrees 10 l'<1l11ply with all I'l'COlIIlIIClllllltions including periodic urine
tesling,
c,) Tlw 1II01111'1' IIgrL'C'S IOllttl'lld IIlld l'Cllllplcle the pan'flt illg program
includin:1 ~itn'ss lIIill1i1gCIH\..'lll I)ffcn.d tll the l'arl h',I~ YWCA.
f) ,\1 tIll' "lid of six 1I111llth". i r lh,' 11,<1,11<," 'p,s succe,;sfully
t:l'lIlpll't~d till' ilgl't-'C'd lIf'Uf1 cnufj:.;~:11 trn' ilIHI Cil.-I j'-;Il' )'WCt\ pro:-,rwlIs.
and PJ'OdUCl':-; dtll'lIllll'nllll ill/! 10 PitH'.' :-,IIi,,(,!::i:-.rul I.ulllplcl inn t,f tilt,
prngrams. till' father lIfo',n,'t".; Ih:ll Ihl; IIHlihef wi II hano: ulI:-iupcrvis!.:t}
periods of pall ial <.:uslndy IIi th the chi lei nn ;dlernat ing weekends
1'1'011I Friday III (i:(lO p.llI. unl i I sUlldll.V al (;:00 p.IiI.. and /Iny olher
t imc$ a~ agrcL'd uplln hy I Ill' pal'l ics.
2. The parties will keep ca<.:h othcr infol'lIied of their addresses amI
telcphone number$.
3. The fathcr wi II nol 1II0ve Ollt of " ~() IIIi Ie raelius uf ('i1r I isle wi lhout
wri lten agreement of the pan ies or Onk-r of ('Ollrt,
4. The futher and IIIl1\llL'r, hy lIIutuill agrecmenl. lIIay vat'y from this
schedulc at llny time hut the order IIi I I I'elllllill in L'ffcct unti I funher Order of
Court.
5. The mother and fllther wi II !llll ify till' olh'~r of all IIIL'eli<.:i1l care the
<.:hi Id I'eel'ive$ whi I" in tllat parc-Ill's '_'arc, I-:;lch p"l'enl wi II IInl i fy the othcl'
immedinlcly of IIIcdical l'mergl'm'ies whieh aris,' whi Ie thc chi lei is in that
parent's care.
.,,'''',..
6. The lIIolher will ,ull ,,"'lIIil lhL' LIII'oI 111 be ill Ihe pre,;cncc or ('JIll I
Placido or her chi Jdren during her periods nr parl illl cuslody unt i I further Order
of Courl.
7. The (lllrl ies real ize thlll their chi I<1's well heilW is (lllramount to nny
differences the~' might hll\'e hetll,'en Ihelllselves.
Therefore, Ihey IIgree thnt
neither (lUrl)' wi II t!o IIn)'lhinl'. which Ilia)' L'slrllllt,:l.' Ihe chi It! from Ihe olher
purent, or injure the o"inion of lhL' "hi Id Il', In Ilu' ollu,r pilrent 01' whi"'l milY
humper the free and 1I11111rlll develo(lIllL'nt of II..' chi ld'.., l'lVl' lIr respect for tile'
ther parent.
8, /lolh pllrl ics agreL' thaI IlLdther wi II l"I,.\:iumc 1111.1' i Ileglll drugs of any
kind at llny time, r\lJlsuln(ltiml oj' sll"h is II \'iolillion of this Order. Neilher
party Ina)' "onsume alcohol lo l'XCl'SS wlli Ie IhL' chi Id is ill lhei I' clIstmly.
9. If IIfler six ',llllllhs Ihe I'arties eannol IIgrec on II specific custody
schedu Ie. l'i I he I' (la I'l y lIIay (lL'l i linn I he ('nu rt ,
WHEREFORE, the part ies reqllesl Ihat a Cllsltldy Order he entered to reflect
.' . .-....,
/ '\
I ,.,/ (/,~'. )1 1_
l" ',_ ~_ / i.' \ 1 ~.." I~ t
G;;-;:;'-;C- illl~,il;irt: lie f ~n(lahfr.-~J-
_~~):r (/r~I5C~:i;"~:
David fl. IIreschi
AI t oriley for Defendllnt
MANCKE, WAGNml, III\llSIII':V & TULLY
22.1.1 North Front SI ree t
IIarrishurg, 1',\ 17110
PI-) 2.1-1-7051
the above te~ I]"
~t.4l( CALl ,~'-
Terri L. Price, PI, nliff
Joan,' re}
Attorney for Plnintiff
IH1Al. Sl'.IlVlCES, INC.
B Irvine Row
Cnrlisle, PA 17013
( 717) 2-13-9400
TERRI L. PRICE,
IN TIlE COURT OF CO~IMON Pl.EAS OF
CUMBERl.AND COllNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 94-2016 CIVIL TERM -'
NO. 94-2158 CIVIL TERM
Plllintiff
v.
GARY A. RA\1IART.
Defendllnt
CUSTODY
AND NOW,
<h;. ~'"
of December, 1994, upon cons idernt ion of the
CUSTODY ORDER
Consent l\grcement, the following Custody Order is entered regarding the parties'
chi Id, Stephanie Dea Rayhnrt.
I. The pllrties shall shllre legal custody.
2. The father shall have primary physiclIl custody.
3. The mother shall have partial custody of the child every other
weekend on Saturday from 9:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. and on Sunday from 9:00 a.m.
until 7:00 p.m. commencing with Saturday, December 17, 1994, and at other times
agreed upon by the parties for a period of six months and on the condition that
the mother's sister, Margie Gessner, her brother, Dean Price, or another agreed
upon party, is present during the periods of custody.
4. The father shall provide transportation to the mother's home during
the six month period and shill I remllin in his vehicle at III I times during transfer
of custody; the mother and father shall share transportation after six months
provided the mother hilS successfully completed the counselling and the Carlisle
YWCA's parenting program including stress management and produces documentation
to prove successful completion of the program.
5. The mother shall attend drug & alcohol counselling and shall comply
with all recommelldlltions including periodic urine testing.
6. The mother shallllttend and complete the parenting program including
stress management offered lit the Carlisle YWCA.
7. At the end of six months. if the mother hils successfully completed
the counselling and carlisle YWCA progrnms, and produces documentation to prove
successful completion of the programs, the mother shall have unsupervised periods
of part ial custody with the chi Id on alternat ing weekends from Fridny at 6:00
p.m. until Sunday at 6:00 p.m., and any other times as agreed upon by the
parties.
8. The parties sind I keep each other informed of their addresses and
telephone numbers.
9. The father shall not move out of a 50 mi Ie radius of Carl isle without
wri tten agreement of the part ies or order of Court.
10. The father and mother, by mutunl agreement, may vary from this
schedule at any time but the order shal I remain in effect unt i I further order of
Court.
II. The mother anel father shall notify the other of all medical care the
child receives while in that parent's care. Each parent shall notify the other
immediately of medical emergencies which arise while the child is in that
parent's care.
12. The mother sluLlI not permit the chi Id to be in the presence of Oai I
Placido or her chi Idren during her per lods of part ial custody unt i I further Order
of Court.
13. Neither party shall do or say anything which may estrange the child
from the other parent, or injure the opinion of the child as to the other parent
or which may hamper the free and natural development of the child's love or
respect for the other parent.
14. Nei ther party shall consume any illegal drugs of any kind at any
time. Consumption of such is a violation of this Order. Neither party shall
consume alcohol to excess while the child is in their custody.
15. If after six months the parties cannot agree on a specific custody
schedule. either party may petition the Court.
Ii
- "LA4.I
Joan Carey
Attorney for Plaintiff
UXlAL SERVICES, INC.
David R. Breschi
Attorney for Defendant
MANCKE, WAGNER, IfERSIIEY &: WLLY
TERRI L. PRICE,
IN TIlE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 94-2016 CIVIL TERM
NO. 94-2158 CIVIL TERM
Plaintiff
v.
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
CUSTODY
This agreement is
CONSIWI' AGRF.a.cENT
entered on this ~ay of December, 1994, by the
plaint iff, Terri 1.. Price, and the defendant, Gary A. Rayhart. The plaint iff is
represented by Joan Carey of LEGAL SERVICES, INC.; the defendant is represented
by David R. Breschi of MANKE, WAGNER, HERSHEY & TULLY. The parties agree that
the following may be entered as a Custody Order.
1. The defendant and plaintiff agree to the entry of an Order providing
for the following custody schedule for their chi hI, Stephanie Bea Rayhart:
a) The father wi II have primary physical custody of the chi Id and
the parties will share legul custody.
b) The mother wi II have part ial custody of the chi III every other
weekend on Saturday from 9:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. and on Sunday
from 9:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. commencing with Saturday. December
17, 1994, and at other times agreed upon by the parties for a period
of six months and on the condition that the mother's sister, Margie
Gessner, her brother, Delln Price, or another agreed upon party, is
present during the periods of custody.
c) The father wi II provide transportation to the mother's home
during the six month period /lnd wi II remain in his vehicle at all
times during t rnnsfer of custody; the mother and father wi II share
trnnsportut ion aftel' six months pl'Ovided the mother has successfully
completed the agreed upon counse II ing and the Car I is Ie YWCA's
DEe I 'j IU 55 l.; '94
\"1
, r
TERRI L. PRICE,
IN TIlE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO. 94-2016 CIVIL TERM
NO. 94-2158 CIVIL TERM
Plaintiff
v.
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
CUSTODY
This agreement is
CONSFNl' AGRF.l\MEN'T
entered on this ~IIY
of December, 1994, by the
plaintiff, Terri L. Price, amI the defendant. Gary A. Rayhart. The plaintiff is
represented by Joan Cllrey of LEGAL SERVICES, INC.; the defendant is represented
by David R. Bresehi of MANKE, WAGNER. ImRSIIEY & TULLY. The part ies agree that
the following may be entered liS II Custody Order.
I. The defendant and pl.dnt i ff agree to the entry of an Order providing
for the following custody schedule for their chi Id, Stephanie nea Rayhart:
a) The father will have primary physical custody of the child and
the parties will share leglll custody.
b) The mother will have partial custody of the child every other
weekend on SnturdllY from 9:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. and on Sunday
from 9:00 11.01. until 7:00 p.m. commencing with Saturday, December
17, 1994, IInd at other times IIgreed upon by the parties for a period
of six months IInd on the condition that the mother's sister, Margie
Gessner, her brother, Delln Price, or llllother agreed upon party, is
present during the periods of custody.
c) The father will provide transportation to the mother's home
during the six month period C1nd wi II remllin in his vehicle at all
times during transfer of custody; the mother and father wi II share
transportat ion after six months provided the mother has successfully
completed the agreed upon counselling and the Carlisle YWCA's
parenting program including stress management and produces
documentat ion to prove successful complet ion of the programs.
d) The mother agrees to attend drug & alcohol counselling and
agrees to comply with all recommendlltions including periodic urine
test ing.
e) The mol her agrees to at tend and complete the parent ing program
including stress manllgement offered lit the carlisle YWCA.
f) At the end of six months, if the mother has successfully
completed the agreed upon counselling and Carlisle YWCA programs,
and produces documentation to prove successful complet ion of the
progrnms, the father IIgrees that the mother wi II have unsupervised
periods of partial custody with the child on IIlternating weekends
from Friday at 6:00 p.m. until Sunday at 6:00 p.m., and any other
times as agreed upon by the parties.
2. The part ies wi 11 keep each other informed of thei r addresses and
telephone numbers.
3. The father will not move out of a 50 mile radius of Carlisle without
written agreement of the parties or Order of Court.
4. The father and mother, by mutulII agreement, muy vary from this
schedule at any time but the order wi II remain in effect unti I further Order of
Court.
5. The mother IInd father wi II notify the other of all medical care the
child receives while in thllt parent's care. Each pllrent will notify the other
immediately of medical emergencies which arise whi Ie the chi ld is in that
parent's care.
6. The mother will not permit the child to be in the presence of Gail
Placido or her children dur ing her per iods of partial custody until further Order
of Court.
7. The parties realize that their child's well being Is paramount to any
differences they might hllve between themselves. Therefore, they agree that
neither pnrty will do anything which may estrange the child from the other
parent, or injure the opinion of the chi Id as to the other parent or which may
hamper the free nod natural development of the chi Id's love or respect for the
ther parent.
8. Bolh part ies Ilgree thllt nei ther wi II consume any illegal drugs of any
kind at any time. Consumption of such is a viollltion of this Order. Neither
party may consume alcohol to excess whi Ie the child is in their custody.
9. I f lifter six months the part ies cannot agree on a specific custody
schedule, either party may petition the Court.
WHEREFORE. the part ies request that a Custody Order be entered to reflect
the
Joan rey
Attorney for Plaintiff
LEGAL SERVICES, INC.
8 Irvine Row
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 243-9400
Oa vA. ayhlrt, efenda t
DfpJ{{[~cC
Attorney for Defendant
MANCKE, WAGNF.R, HERSIIEY & TULLY
2233 North Front Street
lIarri sburg, PA 17110
(717) 234-7051
:" U 3 1996 /)P
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY
Plaintiff
In The Court of Common Pleas
Of Cumberland County Pa.
Terri L. Price
v.
No. 2016 Civil 1994
No. 2158 Civil 1994
Gary A. Rayhart
Defendant
Civil action-custody contempt
NOTICE AND ORDER TO APPEAR
Legal proceedings have been brought against you alleging you
have wilfully disobeyed an order of the court for custody and
visitation of Stephanie Bea Rayhart.
If you wish to defend against this claim set forth in the
following pages, you may but are not required to file in writing
with the court your defenses or objections.
Whether or not you file in writing with the court your
defenses and objections, you must appear in person in court at
the following place and time.
On
CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURTHOUSE
COURTROOM __
CARLISLE, PA. 17013
, 1996 at _:__, _.M.
IF YOU DO NOT APPEAR IN PERSON THE COURT MAY ISSUE A WARRANT
FOR YOUR ARREST
If the court finds that you have wilfully failed to comply
with its order for custody and visitation, you may be found to be
in contempt of court and committed to Jail, fined, or both.
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO
NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CAN NOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE
OFFICE SET FORTH AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU
CAN GET LEGAL HELP.
Cumberland County Courthouse
Fourth Floor
Court Administrator's Office
Carlisle Pa. 17013
(717)240-6200
Gary A. Rayhart
Defendant
Civil action-custody contempt
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY
Plaintiff
In The Court of Common Pleas
Of Cumberland County Pa.
Terri L. Price
v.
No. 2016 Civil 1994
No. 2158 Civil 1994
DEFENDANT'S PETITION TO FIND THE PLAINTIFF IN CONTEMPT
Per the Court Order in this matter which grants visitation/
partial custody of Stephanie Bea Rayhart to the non-Custodial
parent from 3:00 P.M. to 8:00 P.M. on Wednesdays, as modified by
agreement of the parties. Ms. Price has repeatedly violated this
provision which allows Mr. Rayhart to see his daughter.
On August 22, 1996, a Thursday, by agreement of the parties,
Mr. Rayhart was supposed to be able to see Stephanie from 3:30-
8:00 P.M. because his work schedule failed to allow him to see
Stephanie on Wednesday, Ms. Price left no notice for Mr. Rayhart
to state that she had a conflict and to arrange for another date
and time. As a result, Mr. Rayhart was unable to see Stephanie
that entire week.
This behavior of making a date and time for Mr. Rayhart to
see Stephanie and then disappearing with Stephanie when that date
and time arrived has been a consistent behavior on the part of
Ms. Price.
On October 2, 1996, a Wednesday, Mr. Rayhart went to pick up
Stephanie at the last known address of Ms. Price, 443 N.West
Street, Carlisle, Pa. 17013 to discover that she had moved with
Stephanie to points unknown without letting Mr. Rayhart know
where she had moved so that he may maintain contact with
Stephanie. Mr. Rayhart checked with Stephanie's School, Bellevue
Elementary School in the Carlisle School District, to see if
Stephanie was still in attendance, only to discover that Ms.
Price had taken Stephanie out of school on Monday September 30,
1996. Since Ms. Price and Mr. Rayhart were in Judge Sheely's
Courtroom that morning, and she did not inform him of her
intentions, we believe that this was done in order to keep Mr.
Rayhart from seeing his Daughter Stephanie. Only after Mr.
Rayhart's attorney, Daniel Pollock, Esq., had contacted Ms.
Price's Attorney, Samuel Milkes, Esq., did Mr. Rayhart know where
Stephanie was located.
Because of the above mentioned incidents Mr. Rayhart Prays
. ''''!'!Crt.!
....-.--
that this Honorable Court will find Ms. Price in contempt of
court for wilfully failing to allow Mr. Rayhart to see his
daughter Stephanie Rayhart.
Respectf~~ 5~bmijted
W!f~
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill. Pa. 17013
Super.Ct. Id. 70315
(717) 737-7566
Date
,
t
, .
I verify that the statements made in this petition are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand that false
statements knowingly made herein are subject to the penalties
16 Pa, C.S. 4904 relating to unsworn falsifica
authorities.
By Hand delivery
Samuel Milkes Esq.
Jacobson and Milkes
52 East High Street
Carlisle, Pa. 17013
, .
On October 3, 1996 a true and accurate copy of this Petition
was mailed to Samuel Milkes, Esq. Attorney for Terri Price at the
following address:
. .,
OCT 0 3 1996 tI--
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY
Plaintiff
In The Court of Common Pleas
Of Cumberland County Pa,
Terri L. Price
V.
No. 2016 Civil 1994
No. 2158 Civil 1994
Gary A. Rayhart
Defendant
Civil action-custody contempt
NOTICE AND ORDER TO APPEAR
On
, 1996 at ___:____, ___.M.
Legal proceedings have been brought against you alleging you
have wilfully disobeyed an order of the court for custody and
visitation of Stephanie Bea Rayhart.
If you wish to defend against this claim set forth in the
following pages, you may but are not required to file in writing
with the court your defenses or objections.
Whether or not you file in writing with the court your
defenses and objections, you must appear in person in court at
the following place and time.
CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURTHOUSE
COURTROOM "___
CARLISLE, PA. 17013
IF YOU DO NOT APPEAR IN PERSON THE COURT MAY ISSUE A WARRANT
FOR YOUR ARREST
If the court finds that you have wilfully failed to comply
with its order for custody and visitation, you may be found to be
in contempt of court and committed to Jail, fined, or both.
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO
NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CAN NOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE
OFFICE SET FORTH AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU
CAN GET LEGAL HELP.
Cumberland County Courthouse
Fourth Floor
Court Administrator's Office
Carlisle Pa. 17013
(717)240-6200
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY
Terri L. Price
In The Court of Common Pleas
Of Cumberland County Pa.
Plaintiff
v.
No. 2016 Civil 1994
No. 2158 Civil 1994
Gary A. Rayhart
Defendant
Civil action-custody contempt
DEFENDANT'S PETITION TO FIND THE PLAINTIFF IN CONTEMPT
Per the Court Order in this matter which grants visitationl
partial custody of Stephanie Bea Rayhart to the non-Custodial
parent from 3:00 P.M. to 8:00 P.M. on Wednesdays, as modified by
agreement of the parties. Ms. Price has repeatedly violated this
provision which allows Mr. Rayhart to see his daughter.
On August 22, 1996, a Thursday, by agreement of the parties,
Mr. Rayhart was supposed to be able to see Stephanie from 3:30-
8:00 P.M. because his work schedule failed to allow him to see
Stephanie on Wednesday, Ms. Price left no notice for Mr. Rayhart
to state that she had a conflict and to arrange for another date
and time. As a result, Mr. Rayhart was unable to see Stephanie
that entire week.
This behavior of making a date and time for Mr. Rayhart to
see Stephanie and then disappearing with Stephanie when that date
and time arrived has been a consistent behavior on the part of
Ms. Price.
On October 2, 1996, a Wednesday, Mr. Rayhart went to pick up
Stephanie at the last known address of Ms. Price, 443 N.West
Street, Carlisle, Pa. 17013 to discover that she had moved with
Stephanie to points unknown without letting Mr. Rayhart know
where she had moved so that he may maintain contact with
Stephanie. Mr. Rayhart checked with Stephanie's School, Bellevue
Elementary School in the Carlisle School District, to see if
Stephanie was still in attendance, only to discover that Ms.
Price had taken Stephanie out of school on Monday September 30,
1996. Since Ms. Price and Mr. Rayhart were in Judge Sheely's
Courtroom that morning, and she did not inform him of her
intentions, we believe that this was done in order to keep Mr.
Rayhart from seeing his Daughter Stephanie. Only after Mr.
Rayhart's attorney, Daniel Pollock, Esq., had contacted Ms.
Price's Attorney, Samuel Milkes, Esq., did Mr. Rayhart know where
Stephanie was located.
Because of the above mentioned incidents Mr. Rayhart Prays
that this Honorable Court will find Ms. Price in contempt of
court for wilfully failing to allow Mr. Rayhart to see his
daughter Stephanie Rayhart.
"1ZJf/D
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, Pa. 17013
Super.Ct. Id. 70315
(717) 737-7566
. .
I verify that the statements made in this petition are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand that false
statements knowingly made herein are subject to the penal es of
16 Pa. C.S. 4904 relating to unsworn falsifica on 0
authorities.
Date
,
>
I
f
. , '
. , . .
On October 3, 1996 a true and accurate copy of this Petition
was mailed to Samuel Milkes, Esq. Attorney for Terri Price at the
followins address:
By Hand delivery
Samuel Milkes Esq.
Jacobson and Milkes
52 East HiSh Street
Carlisle, Pa. 17013
. '
OCT 0 3 1995 b?-
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY
Plaintiff
In The Court of Common Pleas
Of Cumberland County Pa.
Terri L. Price
v.
No. 2016 Civil 1994
No. 2158 Civil 1994
Gary A. Rayhart
Defendant
Civil action-custody contempt
NOTICE AND ORDER TO APPEAR
Legal proceedings have been brought against you alleging you
have wilfully disobeyed an order of the court for custody and
visitation of Stephanie Bea Rayhart.
If you wish to defend against this claim set forth in the
following pages, you may but are not required to file in writing
with the court your defenses or objections.
Whether or not you file in writing with the court your
defenses and objections, you must appear in person in court at
the following place and time.
CUMBERLAND COUNTY COURTHOUSE
COURTROOM It_
CARLISLE, PA. 17013
On
, 1996 at _:____, _.M.
IF YOU DO NOT APPEAR IN PERSON THE COURT MAY ISSUE A WARRANT
FOR YOUR ARREST
If the court finds that you have wilfully failed to comply
with its order for custody and visitation, you may be found to be
in contempt of court and committed to Jail, fined, or both.
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO
NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CAN NOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE
OFFICE SET FORTH AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU
CAN GET LEGAL HELP.
Cumberland County Courthouse
Fourth Floor
Court Administrator's Office
Carlisle Pa. 17013
(717)240-6200
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY
Terri L. Price
In The Court of Common Pleas
Of Cumberland County Pa.
Plaintiff
v.
No. 2016 Civil 1994
No. 2156 Civil 1994
Gary A. Rayhart
Defendant
Civil action-custody contempt
DEFENDANT'S PETITION TO FIND THE PLAINTIFF IN CONTEMPT
Per the Court Order in this matter which grants visitation/
partial custody of Stephanie Bea Rayhart to the non-Custodial
parent from 3:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. on Wednesdays, as modified by
agreement of the parties. Ms. Price has repeatedly violated this
provision which allows Mr. Rayhart to see his daughter.
On August 22, 1996, a Thursday, by agreement of the parties,
Mr. Rayhart was supposed to be able to see Stephanie from 3:30-
6:00 P.M. because his work schedule failed to allow him to see
Stephanie on Wednesday, Ms. Price left no notice for Mr. Rayhart
to state that she had a conflict and to arrange for another date
and time. As a result, Mr. Rayhart was unable to see Stephanie
that entire week.
see
and
Ms.
This behavior of making a date and
Stephanie and then disappearing with
time arrived has been a consistent
Price.
time for Mr. Rayhart to
Stephanie when that date
behavior on the part of
On October 2, 1996, a Wednesday, Mr. Rayhart went to pick up
Stephanie at the last known address of Ms. Price, 443 N.West
Street, Carlisle, Pa. 17013 to discover that she had moved with
Stephanie to points unknown without letting Mr. Rayhart know
where she had moved so that he may maintain contact with
Stephanie. Mr. Rayhart checked with Stephanie's School, Bellevue
Elementary School in the Carlisle School District, to see if
Stephanie was still in attendance, only to discover that Ms.
Price had taken Stephanie out of school on Monday September 30,
1996. Since Ms. Price and Mr. Rayhart were in Judge Sheely's
Courtroom that morning. and she did not inform him of her
intentions, we believe that this was done in order to keep Mr.
Rayhart from seeing his Daughter Stephanie. Only after Mr.
Rayhart's attorney, Daniel Pollock, Esq., had contacted Ms.
Price's Attorney, Samuel Milkes, Esq., did Mr. Rayhart know where
Stephanie was located.
Because of the above mentioned incidents Mr. Rayhart Prays
, '
that this Honorable Court will find Ms. Price in contempt of
court for wilfully failing to allow Mr. Rayhart to see his
daughter Stephanie Rayhart.
?tJ'flJ-
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, Pa. 17013
Super.Ct. Id. 70315
(717) 737-7566
..
.:_,~,........;.......... .~.".~-
. .. .
I verify that the statements made in this petition are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge. I understand that false
statements knowingly made herein are subject to the penal of
18 Pa. C.S. 4904 relating to unsworn falsific tons
authorities.
Date
. .'
On October 3. 1996 a true and accurate copy of this Petition
was mailed to Samuel Milkes. Esq. Attorney for Terri Price at the
following address:
By Hand delivery
Samuel Milkes Esq.
Jacobson and Milkes
52 East HiSh Street
Carlisle. Pa. 17013
-
TERRI L. PRICE,
Plaintiff
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: NO. 94-2016 CIVIL TERM
94-2158 CIVIL TERM"
V.
GARY A. RAY HART,
Defendant
: CUSTODY
i
H
f,
l'
I
1
I
l
,
I
i
PETITION FOR FINDING OF CONTEMPT AND FOR
MODIFICATION OF COURT'S ORDER
COMES NOW, The Plaintiff in the above-referenced action, Terri L. Price, by
her newly appearing attorney, Samuel W. Milkes, Esq" JACOBSEN & MILKES, and
petitions thi!\ Court for a finding of Contempt on the part of the Defendant, GARY A.
RAYHART, and further petitions this Court for a modification ofits Custody Order
of December 14, 1994. In support of this Petition, Plaintiff asserts the following:
1. By agreement of the parties, the Honorable Harold E. Sheely entered a
Custody Order on December l4, 1994. A copy of this Order is attached.
2. Generally, the Court's December 14, 1994 Order provided that the parties
share legal custody and that the Father have primary physical custody. For the first
six months following the Order, Mother would exercise partial custody every other
weekend from 9:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. During such periods
of custody, Mother was to be in the presence of certain specified individuals. Mother
further agreed under the Order to attend drug and alcohol counseling and to complete
a parenting program.
3. Mother has successfully completed drug and alcohol counseling and the
~,
t-,,'
,
Ii
Ii
~
parenting program envisioned by the Court's Order of December 14, 1994.
4. The Court's prior Order further directed that at the end of six months,
l,;
l,
02.19/.J<lL -f: L't..cL - 9 t..; - '). (II fa
111.;nl<iJ-
~~ ~
c
JACOBSEN & lItffi .Jrns ('
52 East High Street
Carllsle, PA 17013-3085
PlAINTlFf'8 '
EXHIBIT
/
Samuel W. Mllkcs
Andrea C. Jacobsen
Tel 717 249-6427
Fax 717 249-8427
July 8, 1996
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, PA 17011
Re: Price v. Rayhart
Dear Mr. Pollock:
I understand from my client that on occasion, the parties' have agreed to vary
from the schedule set forth in Judge Sheely's Order of June 10, 1996. From my
client's perspective, however, this variance has not worked for reasons which she has
previously discussed with Mr. Rayhart.
I'm writing to confirm what was discussed by the parties this past weekend.
Ms. Price is no longer willing to vary from the terms of Judge Sheely's Order and Mr.
Rayhart should not request that she do so. The schedule for Wednesdays and for
alternating weeks is what Judge Sheely has set forth and this schedule will need to
govern. Obviously, if an emergency arises, such as an injury requiring a doctor visit
or hospitalization, the parties have to work with those circumstances. Otherwise, the
schedule will govern. If a proposal is to be made for variance from the schedule, this
should be made through counsel, not directly by the parties.
I understand from Ms. Price that she has previously asked Mr. Rayhart for
copies of their daughter's inoculation records. Since the parties share legal custody,
certainly she is entitled to this. Since the records are from a doctor in Vll'ginia, my
client is not able to obtain these directly and must do so through Mr. Rayhart. We are
asking that copies of these records be forwarded to me immediately.
Very truly yours,
SWM\jlc
cc: Terri Price
(corr)0708pol1.pri
(
c
, .'
PLAI'NTIFP8 '~;,~::;,
. ...' ...... ..'.-'-"1 <.~'i:!
EXHIBIT :,;".}'!,\
JACOBSEN & MILKES
52 East High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013-3085
Tel 717 249-6427
Fax 717 249-8427
Samuel W. Milkes
Andrea C. Jacobsen
July l6, 1996
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, PA 17011
Re: Price v. Rayhart
Dear Mr. Pollock:
I'm writing to confirm the arrangement which has been agreed to, informally
modifying the term under the current order for the Wednesday time Gary Rayhart is
with Stephanie. Currently, Mr. Rayhart is to have Wednesday evening visits during
the week that he does not have partial custody, as is the case for Ms. Price. So long
as Mr. Rayhart provides Ms. Price, in writing, a statement as to whether he is opting
for Wednesday or Thursday of the following week, and so long as he provides this
statement to Ms. Price at the time of her period of Wednesday visitation, one week in
advance, he will have the option of exercising either Wednesday or Thursday,
depending upon and in order to accommodate his work schedule.
I want to reinforce my client's position as to what occurred in the past. Mr.
Rayhart never spoke with Ms. Price about any proposed modification. He mentioned
to her brother during a Saturday exchange that he would be working the following
Wednesday and wanted to visit Thursday instead. Based upon this communication
through the brother, Ms. Price altered visitation that week. She was never informed
that this would be a regular event and no formal request was ever made to change the
arrangement from Wednesdays. She had no idea that Mr. Rayhart would not be
showing up for his next Wednesday visit but instead would be expecting to visit on
Thursday. We find it rather odd and suspect that if Mr. Rayhart thought there was
an agreement for Thursdays, why would he have shown up a little past the Wednesday
visitation time, to notify Ms. Price that he intended to visit the next day, Thursday?
In any event, this agreement should resolve the situation.
Very truly yours,
I'
BY: S"amuel W. Milkes
SWM\jlc
cc: Terri Price
(corr)0716poll.pri
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT IPOLICE)
Donald 1'/ DAIHL
DISTRICT JUSTICE
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT NO. 09-3-01
Box 361
Ship~ensbur~, Pa. 17257
~o~~LAI~J,~~AW:~:~~:~~ ;r~A~~:;;f.JT;f~
'.- >.':.~;" -.-', ~-::.... '~c"'-' ,,'.'~'''-~
Compl.int Numbe".1 Olh."Plfliclp.nll
l~ql~N:t~U)3~J1 U.\lI'Ull~;\~ g. ~
~!leA~.g~~.iii!i _~ ~'u,
P\.AItmFPS
EXHIBIT
I. 'r."r. James R. HILSON 4553
(N"mr of A/fill"'}
of Pa. state POlice.Carlisle. Pa.
(Id~nrll'" utpJr,mt,,, or "RttlC')' "'p'rJ~'Htl1 (md pollrlC'QllUbdMJ,otl)
R,S,A,
AKA
do hereby state:
(1) 0 I accuse the above named defendant, who lives at the address set Corth above or,
o I accuse an individual whose name is unknown to me but who is described as
=
.;
.
;
'<
~
~
~
~
~
o his nickname or popular designation is unknown to me and. therefore, I have designated him herein as John Doe;
with violating theJlenallaws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at M. J. Hall Carlisle
Car 11 sle Boro rP/oJn"P"',,,("QI Suhd,~ulU'"
in Cumberland County on or about<17 /30/9', 1919 Hrs.
Participants were", 11Il"" "'f"" p""ticipoJ,m. pliJ('t' O,('i, 'I"",,'S "f'I", r..pt'J""~ ,I,t' I,oJ"''' IIJ llh".,,. d,/rndll"tJ
(2) The acts committed by the accused were:0 FUGITIVE FROM JUSTICE - in that
Gary Andrew RAYHART is wanted by the Commonwealth of Virvinia, on the
char~e of Abduction, warrants have been issued in Vir~inia by the York
County Juvenile and Domestic Relation Court, Commonwealth of Vir~illia
advisin~ they will extradite. The warrant is sworn u~on violation of
18.2-47 under Vir~inia Law.
PROBABLE CAUSE BASED ON THE FOLLOWIN:
On 07/30/96 this officer received a warrant for the subject Gary Andrew
RAYHART, from Po~uoson City Police De~artlnent, officer Investi~ator
C.H. BUFFINGTON III,. The warrant was found to be valid and the subject
aid have in custod the minor children, whom he abducted. Based on this
and finain>j the subject fittin,;. the ,jiven descri~tion the above char,Jes
Here filed.
all oC which were against the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth oC Pennsylvania and contrary to the Act of Assembly.
c.r in violation oC 9134," '.' ,,"CC ':and" 0'..;--,) ',',"V,i, ," ;of the Act of''-,Ti'"li ;';'';'''',':I'''i'\ifJ;4'Jt'iri:"" ....:T4?:J?,;;; , ,C,;','
,SUllO'" (Sub.unuml
or the'-"; " ..., '''Ordinance of i,'CommnnwRa.,.t.h,lnfi'Penn"""',i1""'~~;!"l~YI/<l>~n~'t
I PO""t'iT"Si'b.d'~'I.fIO"1
(3) I ask that a warrant oC arrest or a summons be issued and that the accused be required to answer the charges
I have made.
(4) I, veriCy that the Cacts set Corth in this complaint are true and correct to the best oC my knowledge or inCor.
mation and belief. This verification is made subject to the penalties oC Section 4904 oC the Crimes Code
(18 Pa. C.S. 64904) relating to unsworn Calsification to authorities.
01- '3D ,19 9" Ifi,.~ c__C~.AL l{.~~~
1 (SIRna lure of Affiant)
AND NOW, on this ~ 3 () ,19 '1' . I certify the complaint has been properly completed and
verified, and that there ~rolQ\ble cause Cor the issuance ~. ~ ~ ~
() 9 - ~ - I? /, ~.A~ (SEAL)
(Magi,'erial District) (/. uinllllulhority)
"'''11''11\1 ^ I
Filed.........:
8/01/96
3:07
MCS510
1996-00269
Cumberland County - Clerk
Misc. Case Inquiry
RAYHART GARY ANDREW
FUGITIVE FROM JUSTICE
of Courts
Page
1
Mun Code
Comments
********************************************************************************
* Date Entries *
********************************************************************************
08/01/96
08/02196
08/02/96
08/01/96
CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FILED.
BAIL BONDL FILED 8~2/96. PROFESSIONAL BAIL, $2500.00 VIVIAN ROCKY
ORDER OF ~OURT6 FILED 8-1-96. IN RE: BAIL. BAIL IS SET IN THE
AMOUNT OF $250 .00. ORDERED KEVIN A HESS J.
EXTRADITION ORDER 8-1-96. IT IS ORDERED THAT THE COMMONWEALTH OF PA
DELIVER GARY ANDREW RAYHART TO THE AGENTS OF THE STATE OF VIRGINIA,
IN ORDER THAT HE MAY RETURN TO THE STATE OF VIRGINIA. ORDERED
KEVIN A HESS J.
**********************~*********************************************************
* End of Case Information *
********************************************************************************
Cumbel'l ill1d COU'lt'l - Cl et'k 0 f C01H't 5
1 eourthous~ Squarp
Carlislp, PA 17013
Ree" pt n..t e
Recf' pt Timp.
Rece I"t No.
8/15/96
9 : 4 1 : 58
lli.l35084
.
flEeE I PT FOF< i'1 I SCELLANEOUS I Nr;c]~IE
--------------------------..
-------...----.---..----..-----
MIse HOUSE ACCOUNT
Case Number 1995-9999~
Rellat-k;
DOCKn ENTRIES
CONNIE ZnpPIA
MSH
Total Paid $""..**"~*5.1li1.'l ::"(~1T /C~lSH
CERTIFICATION OF BAIL
AND DISCHARGE
OTN
COf"ll,lONW[ Al' tl V~ (OelfJnd,fll H.me and A~'.IIJ
Gary.~p~rcw Rayhart
C/O ~ Staruh
211 Running Pum Rd
ROR (no su,oly) 0 Nominal eail
Iii] Ba,l (Iolal amounl SOl, i1any) S 2 500 . 00
Iii] Conditions 01 Ralaasa (asidalrom appearing al cou" whan required:)
Def to appear at the call of the
District Attorney's Office of
Cumberland County.
(allaeh addandum, iI neeossary)
SECURITY ORSURETY IIF ANY)
o Surely Company .
UI Prolessional Bondsman
o Reaily
o Other
Vivian Rocky
15000008
JUOOE~K.t(tK"1(
Kevin A Hess.
APPEARANCE OR BAIL BOND
THIS BOND IS VALID FOR THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AND
UNTIL FULL AND FINAL DISPOSITION OF THE CASE INCLUDING
FINAL DISPOSITION OF ANY PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
OR APPEAL TIMELY FILED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE
UNITED STATES.
POlICE CASE NO
OJ NO
96-0269, MISC
CP n:HM&NO
CHAAG[ISI
DATE OF CUARGEcSI
Fugitive From Justice
DATE ANO m.AE
NEXT COURT ACTION
lOCATION
TO:
Kl Oolonlion Conler
o Olher
I hereby certify that sufhcienl bail has been entered
fJ By Ihe delendanl 10 On behail ollhe delendanl by:
Vivian Recky 15000008
15 S. Hanover St. Carlisle. PA 17.013
'N''''' & AdtItfJlI 01 Sur,rrJ ILI(''''S. No J
. Relund 01 cash bail will be mada wilhin 20 day. allar
linal disposition, (Pa,R.Cr,P, 4015(b))
. Relund 01 ail olher Iypes 01 bail will be made promplly aller
20 days lollowing linal disposition, (Pa,R.Cr,P, 4015(a))
. Bring Cash Bail Reeeipllo Clerk 01 Courl,
DISCHARGE THE ABOVE. NAMED DEFENDANT FROM CUSTODY IF
DETAINED FOR NO OTHER CAUSE THAN THE ABOVE STATED,
Given under my hand and Ihe Ollieial Seal ollhi~ Courl,
96
,19_,
(SEAL)
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, delendlnl Ind lurlly. our lueee..orl, heirs Ind ..llgnl. Ire Jointly Ind sev,,"lIy bound 10 PlY 10 Ihe
CommonwelUh 01 Pennsylvonlllhe lum 01 dolllrs IS ).
SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR BAIL CONDITIONS ,.
CERTIFICATION OF COUNTER INDEMNITY AND PREMIUM (Applicable Only When Surety Is A Corporation)
, Suraly,
. Principal, and
haraby carllly Ihallha amounl paid by said Principal 10 said Suraly lor bail in Iha abova mallar IS S
and thai no lurther sum or sums is 10 be paid therelore by Ihe said Principal or anyone on hiS behalf,
We further certily that said Principal has given to said Surety counler indemntty consisllng 01
ollha valua 01 S
as lollows:
and no further counter Indemnity is to be given the said Surety except
Walurlhar ca",ly Ihat Ihara ara no judgmanls againstlha said eorporala suraly oulSlanding and unpaid lor a pariod 01 moralhan Ihi"y days Irom Iha dala ollha anlry o!su,Sh
ludgmanl a,capllhosa in which a pelilion 10 open or vatalalha Judgmanl has bean Illed and ramains undisposad 01:
Oalad
,19
MUST BE SIGNED IN PERSON
BY THE APPROVED AGENT
I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I AM LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR
THE FULL AMOUNT OF THE BAIL.
The followmg acknowledgement IS also applicable
If Percenlage Cash Bail IS used
THIS BONO SIGNED ON Au It U 5 t 2
al Co A"" i ~ t e
19~
PENNSYLVANIA
Signed and acknowledged boloro me lhlS
2nd day 01 August
(~/ic,fl{!,~~
. In c,1st:> of corporate surctyba,I, Power 01 AIlorncy mils'
96
.19_
(SEAL)
CP'lfI("wIJ
(SEAL)
(SEAL)
(SEAL I
Bondsman, Ba,' Agency, or pflvate
mdlvldualor organllal/on) Except when d endanr IS released on hiS
own recognilance IROR). rhis musl be Signed in aU bail situations,
Inc/udmg nommal ba/I
"()()IUSSOf SUitt 1'1 SUltl T'fCOU"""'f OROlf lNOo\NI
:''''rl, "I., '" "It"l'nlt""U (JOOIhm,ln I O(r'II~f' "I" t\ "'_''''>(11'' Il,II"
I.:F
ORIGINAL
. In cast,,' 01 Percentage Cash Oa,' Of Nomm.1/ BJII. Powe,
'.- _.~.. ~_....... ~--'
REtE I PT FOR 1'1 I SCFLLANloCUS INCOME
=~===~===~~=~====~===~==
Cumberland County" Clerk of Courti
1 CalU'thou~e Sql.lat'e
Carlisle, Pa 17013
Rec~ipt Date
Receipt TiNe
Receipt No.
8/16/%
13112135
1036 19
MIse HOUSE ACCOUNT
Case Number 1996-99999
Remarks COPIES OF COURT ODERS
TLA
Total Paid $..**.~*.5.00 PYMT/CASH
COMMONWEALTH
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
I
I
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v
GARY ANDREW RAYHART
I MD 96-0269
I
I CHARGE I FUGITIVE FROM JUSTICE
I YORK COUNTY, VIRGINIA
I
AFFIANT: TPR. JAMES WILSON
IN RE: BAIL
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 1st day of August, 1996, bail is
set in the amount of $2,500.00.
By the Court,
-A.d-.
Travis Gery, Esquire
Assistant District Attorney
William Braught, Esquire
Assistant Public Defender
:.~ ..
.",.
c:
",,,
Probation
CCP
Ibg
~, .
,. .
"
. .
~
,-
.
I, GARY ANDREW RAYHART, now being under arrest as a fugitive
of the State of Virginia and being in the custody of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, for the purpose of being extradited
to the State of Virginia and after being informed of my
constitutional and statutory rights to obtain legal counsel, do
hereby waive said rights and consent to the entry of an order
directing my delivery forthwith to the duly accredited agents of
the State of Virginia for return to that jurisdiction, to answer
the charge or charges that may be entered against me by the
demanding State of Virginia.
Signed and sealed before me this
0-
/- day of August 1996.
. 0\".
J.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
96-0269 MISCELLANEOUS
IN RE: EXTRADITION OF GARY ANDREW RAYHART
AND NOW, to wit: this
,"
day of August 1996, it appearing
to the Court that GARY ANDREW RAYHART is now a fugitive from the
State of Virginia and now in the custody of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania;
AND it further appearing that GARY ANDREW RAYHART expressed
a desire and willingness to return to the State of Virginia
without a warrant of extradition being issued by the Governor of
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania;
AND it further appearing that, in accordance with the
provisions of the Uniform Extradition Act, the said GARY ANDREW
RAYHART has been informed of his/her constitutional and statutory
rights to obtain a Writ of Habeas Corpus and to procure legal
counsel, and has waived such rights and consents to hiS/her
return to the State of Virginia.
IT IS ORDERED that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, deliver
up the custody of GARY ANDREW RAYHART to the duly accredited
agents of the State of Virginia in order that he/she may return.
'-::
c-,
to the State of Virginia. A copy of this Order is to be
delivered to said agents.
, ,
By the Court,
: '
.
/1/L
J.
. ....
~
-...
, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
COUNTY OF:
COMMITMENT
llag Ohl No:
,'.. ~;.. ...' I
COMMONWEALTH OF
PENNSYLVANIA
OJ NatM: Hon.
,.
......,'
, ,
..
, ;
"
VS.
DEFENDANT:
r
NAME and AllOAEllS
-,
T_(/;~ )
,
.,.....i.
,," '~"II
I,' .
L-'''. ,.I."ll/!./~ ' '~,('1 ~
'to' , .../ j/'
/I/-I L~r!:"'''.'',,4 " i!/.
1./ I., ,; rJ, 1'7013'
~a,.,.fc-1'...
II
~. ,....
", ~
I. ',I ~"".l.
~.
I ~ .' . I I
L
Docket No,:' .. ' " .',' , . , ''I
Date Flied: 'i - ; ,-
'J'" ' , ,.
- i
(Charga)
~,,)
(Charga)
To ANY AUTHORIZED PERSON of the above named County 01 this Commonwealth:
You are hereby commanded to convey and deliver into the custody 01 the Keeper of the county prison the
above named delendant. You, the Keeper are required to receive the delendant into your custody to be
safely kept by you until disclz\!ijUld by due course of law or lor:
GJ A PERIOD OF:..L2.. DAYS UNTIL
o A HEARING AT
II Date: ,
, ~~ 'I . / l"
Time:
o A FURTHER HEARING
II Date:
, Time:
o COMMON PLEAS COURT ACTION
o OTHER:
"": ,,"
.. /..-:.
"
.;.....1. .
1
I'"'" .
'-',,' ~j " '.
, "
. ,
~ P1,~
L
CURRENT AMOUNT OF BAIL: ii,
r r
Witness my hand and official seal this_'day of
19 " ,,,,, ",
, --:-:.,..; ,
.:.... ....'. .......
,
.
.
/
/
Date
, ..
.: '-...:..,' . .
"
"
, ',:': '., District Justice
"
:.:}", : .
\. --:.:', . . SEAL -/ . :
. .;> . . .0 t' ..:..
'" '0. .0'....'
". "~'I ........~... ........
'", ',TV. rl' ,....
";4"'11111'1'" '
My commission expires /irst Monday of January,
"
AOPC 609-93
JACOBSEN & MILKES
52 East High Street
Carlisle. PA 17013-3085
Samuel W. Mllkes
Andrea C. Jacobsen
Tel 717 249-6427
Fax 717249-8427
May 30, 1996
Honorable Harold E. Sheely
Cumberland County Courthouse
1 Court.house Square
Carlisle, PA 17013
Re: Price v. Rayhart, Nos. 94-2016, 94-2158
Dear Judge Sheely:
Especially in light of Mr. Po!loek'sletter to you dated May 20, 1996, and the fact
that this matter is pending before you for a custody determination, I am compelled to
inform you that on the evening of May 28, 1996, Mr. Rayhart dropped off the child,
Stephanie, with Ms. Price, stating that he was leaving Stephanie with Ms. Price for "a
week or so" while Mr. Rayhart completed a move to York, Pennsylvania. We believe
this is of special concern, in part because it represents a move so quickly after the
Court's hearing, without any advance suggestion to the Court or to Ms. Price that he
had any intention of moving. This also prompted me to contact the Montgomery
Wards in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, where Mr. Pollock had indicated Mr. Rayhart was
scheduled to begin work "the first week in June," or next week. When I contacted Mr.
Dunkel at the Montgomery Wards Automotive Department, listed in Mr. Pollock's
letter, for confIrmation of Mr. Rayhart's employment, I learned that Mr. Dunkel is out
of town. However, Ms. Betty Suchocki, head of the personnel department, was unable
to confll'm for me today that Mr. Rayhart is scheduled for employment.
Sincerely,
SWM\sm
cc: Daniel Pollock, Esq.
Terri Price
(corr)0529she.pri
DAHlE!.. POJ..UX;K, El)lJ.
"'05 ow liET'nSBUKG ROAD
CAMP HJ.LJ.., PA. 17011
HAY 20, 199b
lbe Honorable Harold Sheely
CUlIDerland County Courthouse
Carl1s1e, Pa. 1101"
He: Price V. Nayhart
~loyment ot liary Nayhart
'1'0 the Honorable Court:
1 am writing this letter as written
contirmation ot the phone call 1 made to your statt in regards to
Gary Nayhart's tuture employment. Gary 1s set to go to work at
Montgomery Wards automot1ve repa1rs department 1n Carl1sle
starting the 1st weeK 11I June. '1'h1s can be conUrme<l by the
toHowing person.
BoD DullKel
Montgomery Waras Automot1ve Department
Carlisle Pa. 170,.,
2119-olSJO
By the sending 01 this letter 1 am contirm1ng that a
copy is being sent to Sam Mi.lkes ot Jacobson and M1.lkeS, counsel
tor Ms. Terri Price, I'la1ntit'I.
m:DY~~
Daniel p!Z.}7~k
00: Sam HI.lkes
Gary Nayhart
Flle
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
Plaintiff
""'" .c\t.
" (f' ''YJ "
~~.- .~r.<: hi!
r.', . '"
~. \::';-- ...
""
v.
Alleged Charge: Abduction of
Minor Children
GARY ANDREW RAYHART
Defendant
NO.
1996
MOTION FOR AN ORDER OF NOLLE PROS
AND NOW COMES, Defendant, Gary Andrew Rayhart, by his
signature and signature of counsel below, respectfully petitions
this Honorable Court to enter an Order of Nolle Pros in the above
referenced matter.
Additionally, the Defendant respectfully requests this
Honorable Court to enter an Order of Nolle Pros without requiring
the Defendant to physically appear before the Court.
The above request is made pursuant to a request from
Investigator C. W. Buffington, III, of the Poquoson City Police
Department who was the chief investigator in the above-referenced
criminal matter.
It is defense counsel's understanding that Investigator
Buffington has requested the Court to enter this Order of Nolle
Pros without the necessity of the Defendant physically appearing
before this Honorable Court so that this matter can be
expeditiously resolved.
.
WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court
enter an Order Nolle Pros all criminal charges currently pending
against said Defendant.
Q9 ~(RL
Attorney for Defendant
Paul Brandford Orr, Esquire
78 West Pomfret Street
Carlisle, PA 17055
(717) 258-8558
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
I.D. No. 71786
I verify that the statements made in the foregoing Motion for an Order of Nolle Pros are /rue .
and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject 10 the penalties of Pa. C.S. ~
4904, rel~ting to unsworn falsification to authorities.
DATE: 'Y' - '?- { ~
.
, .
'.
VIRGINIA:
IN THE JUVENILE AND DOMESTIC RELAT
COUNTY OF YORK THE CITY OF POQUOSO
COMMONWEALTH
D ~@~TIW(g n
cl!JJi.J j.~H U
.
."
.'
GARY ANDREW RAYHART
Dsy
v.
MOTION TO OUASH WARRANT
Comes now, Eileen M. Addison, Commonwealth's Attorney for the
County of York and City of Po quos on , Virginia, and respectfully
moves the Court to enter an Order Quashing the Warrant issued
against the above-names Defendant on the 29th day of July, 1996,
charging that:
"That on or about July 29, 1996 Gary Andrew Rayhart did
{abduct Garrett A. Rayhart, Brandon J. RaYhart and
Tiffany L.Rayhart,in violation of ~8.2-47 of the Virginia
Code amended ~950. " .
Said Commonwealth's Attorney represents that if it were
presented, the Commonwealth's evidence would be insufficient to
sustain a orima facie case against the Defendant, and said Warrant
has not been executed.
M~~
P~A '~~)
Eileen M. Addison
Commonwealth's Attorney
Date: August ~2, 1996
Yorktown, Virginia
ORDER
MOTION GRANTED, AND ENTERED THIS
DAY OF
, 1996.
James H. Smith, Judge
Thank you Cor any assistance you may render my client in this matter. I look Corward to your
PAUL BRADFORD ORR
Attorney at Law
p.- ':, /I;;-"~, r.~'I\"~ ^'.-'
. I .'."
! .' ~ .- .
.
. .
78 West PomCret Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
Telephone (717) 258-8558
TeleCax (717) 243-0061
August 14, 1996
District Attorney M. L. Eben
District Attorney's Office
Cumberland County Coun House
One Court House Square
Carlisle, PA 17013
~.-..,_.
RE:. Commonwealth v. Gary Andrew Rayhan
Docket No. MD-OOOOO31-96 Date Filed: 7/30/96
Charge: Tille 42, Section 9136. Commitment to Await Extradition .\
Hearing now scheduled Cor 8/29/96 at 10:30 a.m. J
Dear District Attorney Ebert: ..---------.....
Please be advised that I represent Gary Rayhan in the above-referenced matter. As your office
should know by now, on or about August 7, 1996, the charge5 against Mr. Rayhan were dropped by
the Poquoson City, Virginia, Police Department. Subsequent to the dismissal oC those charges, your
office contacted me and requested inCormatlon in my file which had been forwarded to Investigator C.
W. Buffmgton m oC the Poquoson City Police Department. Therefore, please fmd enclosed various
documents, including a three-page statement given to Mr. Buffmgton by Mr. Rayhan, a motion Cor
order of nolle pros as requested by Poquoson City Police Department, and various letters written by the
mother who f1Ied these false charges, Tammy Marshall, which I have in my file.
If your office needs anything else in order to conclude this matter, please contact me at your
convenience.
On a slightly unrelated matter, my client would respectfully request that your office pursue
charging Ms. Tammy Marshall with making Calse statements to authorities. The enclosed inCormation
will clearly demonstrate to your office that she had given my client permission to have his children
over the summer and all these charges arose out oC completely false allegations.
reply.
Sincerely,
PAUL BRADFORD ORR, ESQUIRE
PBO:blb
Enclosures
cc: Gary Andrew Rayhan
HOUSING AUTHORl'I'Y
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY
t 14 N. HANOWR ST. - sn;:. t04
CARUSLE. PA t70t3.;z4411
TelcphanerroY (717) 249-13111
697-7703
1132-86011
FAX 249-4071
. RENTAL HOUSINO FOR FAMWES
. RENTAL HOUSINO FOR ELDERLY
. RENTAL HOUSINO FOR PERSONS
wmt SPECIAL NEEDS
. RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROORAMS
. F1RST-nME HOMEBUYER PROORAMS
. SUPPORIlVE SERVICES/EMPOWERMENT
PROORAMS
September 10, 1996
To Whom It May Concern:
Please be advised that Gary Rayhart had applied for rental assistance
for himself and his daughter, Stephanie on March 27, 1995,
On July 31, 1996, after a 16-month wait, Gary's name finally reached
the top of our Waiting List. According to federal guidelines for our
rental assistsnce program, Gary must have at least SO/50 custody of his
daughter, Stephanie to qualify for any type of rental assistanee provided
through our Housing Authority.
Gary's present housing is being provided only on a temporary basis
by his sister until other more permanent arrangements can be made.
Qualifying for rental assistance through our Housing Authority would certainly
benefit Gary in securing more suitable housing elsewhere for himself and
Stephanie.
If you have any questions regarding this matter or need further
information, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Yvonne Heckler
Rental Assistance Program Supervisor
YH/vk
c~~G..fl~i&j11&~
TERRI L. PRICE,
Plaintiff
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: NO. 94-2016 CML TERM
94-2158 CML TERM
V.
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
: CUSTODY
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this _ day of
, 1996, after reviewing the
Defendant's Petition to Find Plaintiff in Contempt and Plaintiff's Answer to the
Defendant's Petition, it is HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED as follows:
1) Defendant's Petition to Find Plaintiff in Contempt is hereby dismissed.
2) The Parties shall have joint legal custody of the minor child, Stephanie
Rayhart.
3) Mother shall have primary physical custody of the child.
4) Commencing the weekend of October 19, 1996, Father shall have periods
of partial physical custody every other weekend from Friday at 6:00 p.m. until Sunday
at 6:00 p.m. and every Wednesday evening from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., unless Father
requests the weekday times be changed to a different weekday, to accommodate his
work schedule. Any work-related change to this schedule shall be submitted to Mother
in writing one week in advance of the schedule change.
5) The parties shall alternate the following holidays: Christmas Eve (6:00
p.m. through Christmas day at 12:00 noon), Christmas Day, New Year's Day, Easter,
Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving, and Stephanie's Birthday.
Mother shall exercise Thanksgiving 1996 to start this schedule. Other than Christmas
Eve and Christmas Day, times shall be from 10:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m. and these
schedules take precedence over usually scheduled custody or partial custody.
6) Father shall be entitled to two weeks over the summer, providing he gives
at least 30 days advance written notice of the weeks he intends to exercise this option.
BY THE COURT:
J.
TERRI L. PRICE.
Plaintiff
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEf.s OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
1,
t
V.
.
.
: NO. 94-2016 CML TERM
94-2158 CML TERM
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
: CUSTODY
~~.tWl"'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S ~ETITION
TO FIND PLAIl'II'l'll"F: IN CONTEMI!T
COMES NOW, the Plaintiff in the above-referenced action, Terri L. Price, by
her attorney, Samuel W. Milkes, Esq., JACOBSEN & MILKES, and responds to the
Defendant's Petition to Find the Plaintiff in Contempt as follows:
1. With short notice to the Plaintiff, Terri L. Price. the Plaintiff's mother
notified Plaintiff that she would be moving to Shippensburg, Pennsylvania due to
changed job opportunities.
2. This placed Plaintiff in the position of suddenly having to find new
housing; a circumstance which she had not expected to be faced with until her planned
move to a mobile home was arranged.
3. Because Plaintiff was unable to pay the $525 monthly rent on her
mother's rental house, in order to remain residing in that house, Plaintiff located a
new residence and began residing in this residence on October 1, 1996.
4. Plaintiff's new residence is located at 50 Mountain Road. Carlisle,
Pennsylvania, and has a monthly rental amount of $220. The residence is a half of a
double home, located in an attractive residential community.
5. Ms. Price had intended to telephone Mr. Rayhart at his work, in order to
notify him of the change of address and location where he could exchange visitation
for the weekend of October 5 and 6 but because Mr. Rayhart came to her residence on
the evening of October 3, the discussion occurred at that time instead.
6. As had been true for the Defendant, Mr. Rayhart, the PlaintifTwas under
the mistaken impression that she could leave her daughter in the Carlisle School
District even if she moved out of the district, 50 long as she continued to transport her
daughter on a daily basis to school.
7. The Plaintiff learned through advice of her counsel and through school
officials that her daughter, Stephanie, would not be able to remain in the Clil'lisle
School District because of the change of residence.
8. Plaintiff has enrolled Stephanie in the Middlesex Elementary School, a
school which the child Stephanie is now attending.
9. Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the change of schooling location. In
the discussion that took place between the two of them, Defendant did not raise any
objections to this change of schooling and in fact stated that he was pleased that the
daughter would now be attending schooling which allowed the daughter to be bused
to school rather than transported by others, considering he had raised some objections
to the prior transportation arrangements.
10. The current custody order in effect provides primary custody to Terri
Price in order to facilitate the child's enrollment in school and does not set forth any
specific partial custody schedule.
11. As was testified to and argued at the September 30, 1996 hearing and as
has been testified to at prior hearings, significant disputes have occurred in the past
when the schedules are not specifically set forth in very clear terms, because Father
often appears at the residence without advance notice, expecting then and there to
exercise visitation. For example, under the current status quo, therefore, the parties
have apparently developed different understandings as to what the exchange
arrangement is.
12. A letter entered into evidence at the September 30 hearing, and attached
hereto, dated August 23, 1996 suggested a proposed schedule for Father to exercise
visitation pending further Order of Court or agreement of the parties. Because the
Court's Order did not set forth a specific schedule for this purpose, Mother
immediately took the initiative, through her attorney, to propose a schedule. The
letter proposed as follows:
With Terri having primary physical custody, and with a transfer of Stephanie's
physical custody otherwise, under the prior order, being scheduled for this
Sunday, August 25, we are proposing that Gary have from Sunday to Monday
evening with Stephanie and that Stephanie then be returned to Terri at that
time in order to start school on Tuesday the 27th. Stephanie should be
returned by 5:00 p.m. on Monday in order to have some time to get ready for
her fIrst day of school the following morning. Thereafter, beginning the
weekend of September 7 and 8, and also including the weekend of September
21 and 22, we are proposing that Gary have Stephanie every other weekend
from Friday evening to Sunday evening. A 5:00 p.m. time of exchange on each
of those days would make sense to me although we are receptive to suggestions
about a different time if this is inconsistent with his employment schedule or
some other scheduling problems. If Mr. Rayhart wishes to propose a
weekday evening on the weeks during which he will not have a
weekend of partial custody, we would be receptive to a suggestion on
this, Our only concern, of course, would be that Stephanie cannot be
getting home too late, given her school schedule. (Emphasis added).
13. In a subsequent telephone conversation between counsel, Father's time with
Stephanie was enlarged during the first week of school only. Thereafter, no specific
agreement was ever reduced to writing, although Father continued to exercise every-
other weekend visitation.
14. Under a prior agreement reached by the parties, and documented in the
attached letter of Mother's counsel dated July 16, 1996, the parties reached an
agreement in order to facilitate Mr. Rayhart's weekday evening partial custody, in
order to accommodate his work schedule. This weekday visitation was provided for in
a prior Court Order, superseded by the Order transferring primary custody to Mother.
Since Mr. Rayhart's work schedule fluctuated from week to week, it was agreed by the
parties that Mr. Rayhart would provide Ms. Price one week's advance notice, in
wliting, as to when his weekday evening visitation would be, either on a Wednesday
or Thursday, depending upon his schedule. The letter included the following
discussion:
I'm writing to confIrm the arrangement which has been agreed to,
informally modifying the term under the current order for the Wednesday time
Gary Rayhart is with Stephanie. Currently, Mr. Rayhart is to have Wednesday
evening visits during the week that he does not have partial custody, as is the
case for Ms. Price. So long as Mr. Rayhart provides Ms. Price, in writing, a
statement as to whether he is opting for Wednesday or Thursday of the
following week, and so long as he provides this statement to Ms. Price at the
time of her period of Wednesday visitation, one week in advance, he will have
the option of exercising either Wednesday or Thursday, depending upon and in
order to accommodate his work schedule.
15. Under the Order now in effect, there is no specific schedule for Father's
visitation, but by exchange of correspondence, the parties agreed upon an every-other-
weekend schedule. There exists no specific agreement regarding weekdays and there
is no Order now in effect, providing for weekdays with Father.
16. Mr. Rayhart did not provide any advance notice whatsoever, whether in
writing or otherwise, of his intention to visit with Stephanie during a weekday evening
the week beginning September 30, 1996.
17. Mr. Rayhart did not provide any advance notice whatsoever, whether in
...~..""'___'_ __._ .<..-.~.""'.1;
writing or otherwise, of his intention to visit with Stephanie during a weekday evening
the week beginning October 7, 1996.
18. Since the most recent hearing, Mr. Rayhart has exercised visitation with
the child during the customary every other weekend, with this having occurred the
weekend of October 5 and 6, 1996, beginning Friday evening and ending on Sunday
evening.
19. Despite his failure to provide advance notice, Mr. Rayhart appeared at Ms.
Price's residence on Wednesday evening, October 9, 1996 and exercised visitation
during that weekday evening.
20. Terri Price remains ready and available to facilitate regular exchanges of
Stephanie with her Father according to a set schedule and looks to the Court to set
forth such a schedule in order to have the parties clearly advised as to appropriate
expectations.
21. Terri Price has not violated any Court Orders, or even any agreements of
the parties.
WHEREFORE, for the above-referenced reasons, Plaintiff respectfully requests
of this court that it dismiss the petition without need for a hearing, since the petition
alleges a schedule which did not exist and therefore no violation of an order occurred.
The Petitioner further requests that in connection with the entry of an overall custody
Order in this case, the Order provide primary physical custody with mother,
alternating holidays between the parties, alternating weekends with father from Friday
evening to Sunday evening, commencing the weekend of October 19 and 20, 1996, and
one weekday evening per week from 4:00 p.m to 8:00 p.m., to occur on Wednesdays,
-.
...,.......--.,
unless father has provided one week's advance written notice that he intends to
exercise this period on the following Thursday instead of Wednesday.
DATE: lO\lb \ %
Respectfully submitted,
BY: Samuel . Milkes, Esq.
JACOBSEN & MILKES
52 E. High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 249-6427
Attorney No. 30130
".---..----:_~....-
I hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing 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.
Dated:
101' IPI qLP
L.~1
" Yf//j(( I. ,fA! C
TERRI PRlCE/
(-
c
JACOBSEN & MILKES
52 East High Street
Carlisle, P A 17013-3085
Tel 717249-6427
Fax 717 249-8427
Samuel W. Mllkes
Andrea C. Jacobsen
July 16, 1996
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, P A 17011
Re: Price v. Rayhart
Dear Mr. Pollock:
I'm writing to confirm the arrangement which has been agreed to, informally
modifying the term under the current order for the Wednesday time Gary Rayhart is
with Stephanie. Currently, Mr. Rayhart is to have Wednesday evening visits during
the week that he does not have partial custody, as is the case for Ms. Price. So long
as Mr. Rayhart provides Ms. Price, in writing, a statement as to whether he is opting
for Wednesday or Thursday of the following week, and so long as he provides this
statement to Ms. Price at the time of her period of Wednesday visitation, one week in
advance, he will have the option of exercising either Wednesday or Thursday,
depending upon and in order to accommodate his work schedule.
I want to reinforce my client's position as to what occurred in the past. Mr.
Rayhart never spoke with Ms. Price about any proposed modification. He mentioned
to her brother during a Saturday exchange that he would be working the following
Wednesday and wanted to visit Thursday instead. Based upon this communication
through the brother, Ms. Price altered visitation that week. She was never informed
that this would be a regular event and no formal request was ever made to change the
arrangement from Wednesdays. She had no idea that Mr. Rayhart would not be
showing up for his next Wednesday visit but instead would be expecting to visit on
Thursday. We find it rather odd and suspect that if Mr. Rayhart thought ther~ was
an agreement for Thursdays, why would he have shown up a little past the Wednesday
visitation time, to notify Ms. Price that he intended to visit the next day, Thursday?
In any event, this agreement should resolve the situation.
Very truly yours,
J
SWM\jlc
cc: Terri Price
(corr)0716poll.pri
( JACOBSEN & MILKES
52 East High Street
Carlisle, P A 17013-3085
(
Samuel W. Mllkes
Andrea C.lacobsen
Tel 717249-6427
Fax 717249-8427
August 23, 1996
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, PA 17011
Re: Price v. Rayhart
Dear Dan:
First of all, I wanted to make sure that you have a copy of the enclosed Order,
which I obtained on Friday. With Terri having primary physical custody, and with a
transfer of Stephanie's physical custody otherwise, under the prior order, being
scheduled for this Sunday, August 25, we are proposing that Gary have from Sunday
to Monday evening with Stephanie and that Stephanie then be returned to Terri at
that time in order to start school on Tuesday the 27th. Stephanie should be returned
by 5:00 p.m. on Monday in order to have some time to get ready for her first day of
school the following morning. Thereafter, beginning the weekend of September 7 and
8, and also including the weekend of September 21 and 22, we are proposing that'Gary
have Stephanie every other weekend from Friday evening to Sunday evening. A 5:00
p.m. time of exchange on each of those days would make sense to me although we are
receptive to suggestions about a different time if this is inconsistent with his
employment schedule or some other scheduling problems. If Mr. Rayhart wishes to
propose a weekday evening on the weeks during which he will not have a weekend of
partial custody, we would be receptive to a suggestion on this. Our only concern, of
course, would be that Stephanie cannot be getting home too late, given her school
schedule.
Finally, I want to address the situation that occurred this past week. Terri
reports to me that Gary came to her residence on Wednesday, August 21st to say that
due to his work schedule, he would be coming on Thursday, August 22nd, to pick up
Stephanie. Although this manner of rescheduling is inconsistent with the one-week
advance written notice that had previously been agreed upon, Terri agreed to this
revision and Mr. Rayhart left to go to work. At the time, Terri had forgotten that she
was scheduled for an appointment at Alexander Spring Rehab for work on her arm,
which was iIijured at her employment. Since there was no one at the home to leave
Stephanie with on Thursday, Terri had to take Stephanie with her to the appointment
at Alexander Spring Rehab on Thursday afternoon and she did not return until
slightly after 4:00 p.m. on Thursday. Stephanie was available from this time on for
Gary to pick her up but unfortunately, both before and after the Thursday time, Terri
had no way of getting a hold of Gary and she was therefore not able to meet the
('
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
August 23, 1996
Page Two
. revised time. We regret that this development occurred but would suggest situations
such as this emphasize why there needs to be advance notice of changed days, 80 that
they can be thought through and so that problems of this sort can be avoided. I have
emphasized to Terri that she needs to be careful in the future to avoid developments
such as this and I would suggest of your client that if he is able to keep Terri notified
as to how she can reach him, then these problems might also be avoided when they do
arise with short notice.
Very truly yours,
SWM\jlc
Enclosure
cc: Terri Price
(corr)0823poll.pri
f<-~~""'~'.~
TERRI L. PRICE,
Plaintiff
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
.
.
: NO. 94-2016 CML TERM
94-2158 CML TERM
: CUSTODY
CER'1'U"1CATE OF SERVICE
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
I, Jennifer L. Coyle, hereby certify that a copy of the Plaintiff's Answer to
Defendant's Petition to Find Plaintiff in Contempt in the above captioned matter was
duly served upon the Defendant's attorney, Daniel Pollock, Esq., by depositing the
same in the U.S. Mail, on October 16, 1996, addressed as follows:
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, PA 17011
I hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing 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.
Dated: IO//wjq (0
... Lt)
Lo
'-
,---= ~ ~t;:
lU(~ c'-;
( ) " ,.-......
~-( -.....w
.. :~l..
,.. '..". < ::~
c,~ l
(")' ,', .--)
lij:'.: , ,
, =;;-
Ci::L' I'~' ,.J
L '~
I \..
1.'- I'~ ,.'
L' L' ~)
schedules take precedence over usually scheduled custody or partial custody.
6) Father shall be entitled to two weeks over the summer, providing he gives
at least 30 days advance written notice oCthe weeks he intends to exercise this option.
BY THE COURT:
J.
TERRI L. PRICE,
Plaintiff
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
.
.
: NO. 94-2016 CML TERM
94.2158 CML TERM
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
: CUSTODY
PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S PETITION
::ro FIND PLAIN:l',Ut:l<' IN CONTEMPT
COMES NOW, the Plaintiff in the above-referenced action, Terri L. Price, by
her attorney, Samuel W. Milkes, Esq., JACOBSEN & MILKES, and responds to the
Defendant's Petition to Find the Plaintiff in Contempt as follows:
1. With short notice to the Plaintiff, Terri L. Price, the Plaintiff's mother
notified Plaintiff that she would be moving to Shippensburg, Pennsylvania due to
changed job opportunities.
2. This placed Plaintiff in the position of suddenly having to find new
housing; a circumstance which she had not expected to be faced with until her planned
move to a mobile home was arranged.
3. Because Plaintiff was unable to pay the $525 monthly rent on her
mother's rental house, in order to remain residing in that house, Plaintiff located a
new residence and began residing in this residence on October 1, 1996.
4. Plaintif'f's new residence is located at 50 Mountain Road, Carlisle,
Pennsylvania, and has a monthly rental amount of $220. The residence is a half of a
double home, located in an attractive residential community.
5. Ms. Price had intended to telephone Mr. Rayhart at his work, in order to
notify him of the change of address and location where he could exchange visitation
for the weekend of October 5 and 6 but because Mr. Rayhart came to her residence on
the evening of October 3, the discussion occurred at that time instead.
6. As had been true for the Defendant, Mr. Rayhart, the Plaintiff was under
the mistaken impression that she could leave her daughter in the Carlisle School
District even if she moved out of the district, so long as she continued to transport her
daughter on a daily basis to school.
7. The Plaintiff learned through advice of her counsel and through school
officials that her daughter, Stephanie, would not be able to remain in the Carlisle
School District because of the change of residence.
8. Plaintiff has enrolled Stephanie in the Middlesex Elementary School, a
school which the child Stephanie is now attending.
9. Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the change of schooling location. In
the discussion that took place between the two of them, Defendant did not raise any
objections to this change of schooling and in fact stated that he was pleased that the
daughter would now be attending schooling which allowed the daughter to be bused
to school rather than transported by others, considering he had raised some objections
to the prior transportation arrangements.
10. The current custody order in effect provides primary custody to Terri
Price in order to facilitate the child's enrollment in school and does not set forth any
specific partial custody schedule.
11. As was testified to and argued at the September 30, 1996 hearing and as
has been testified to at prior hearings, significant disputes have occurred in the past
when the schedules are not specifically set forth in very clear terms, because Father
oCten appears at the residence without advance notice, expecting then and there to
exercise visitation. For example, under the current status quo, therefore, the parties
have apparently developed different understandings as to what the exchange
arrangement is.
12. A letter entered into evidence at the September 30 hearing, and attached
hereto, dated August 23, 1996 suggested a proposed schedule for Father to exercise
visitation pending further Order of Court or agreement of the parties. Because the
Court's Order did not set forth a specific schedule for this purpose, Mother
immediately took the initiative, through her attorney, to propose a schedule. The
letter proposed as follows:
With Terri having primary physical custody, and with a transfer of Stephanie's
physical custody otherwise, under the prior order, being scheduled for this
Sunday, August 25, we are proposing that Gary have from Sunday to Monday
evening with Stephanie and that Stephanie then be returned to Terri at that
time in order to start school on Tuesday the 27th. Stephanie should be
returned by 5:00 p.m. on Monday in order to have some time to get ready for
her first day of school the following morning. Thereafter, beginning the
weekend of September 7 and 8, and also including the weekend of September
21 and 22, we are proposing that Gary have Stephanie every other weekend
from Friday evening to Sunday evening. A 5:00 p.m. time of exchange on each
of those days would make sense to me although we are receptive to suggestions
about a different time if this is inconsistent with his employment schedule or
some other scheduling problems. If Mr. Rayhart wishes to propose a
weekday evening on the weeks during which he will not have a
weekend of partial custody, we would be receptive to a suggestion on
this. Our only concern, of course, would be that Stephanie cannot be
getting home too late, given her school schedule. (Emphasis added).
13. In a subsequent telephone conversation between counsel, Father's time with
Stephanie was enlarged during the ftrst week of school only. Thereafter, no specific
agreement was ever reduced to writing, although Father continued to exercise every-
other weekend visitation.
14. Under a prior agreement reached by the parties, and documented in the
attached letter of Mother's counsel dated July 16, 1996, the parties reached an
agreement in order to facilitate Mr. Rayhart's weekday evening partial custody, in
order to accommodate his work schedule. This weekday visitation was provided for in
a prior Court Order, superseded by the Order transferring primary custody to Mother.
Since Mr. Rayhart's work schedule fluctuated from week to week, it was agreed by the
parties that Mr. Rayhart would provide Ms. Price one week's advance notice, in
writing, as to when his weekday evening visitation would be, either on a Wednesday
or Thursday, depending upon his schedule. The letter included the following
discussion:
I'm writing to conftrm the arrangement which has been agreed to,
informally modifying the term under the current order for the Wednesday time
Gary Rayhart is with Stephanie. Currently, Mr. Rayhart is to have Wednesday
evening visits during the week that he does not have partial custody, as is the
case for Ms. Price. So long as Mr. Rayhart provides Ms. Price, in writing, Il
statement as to whether he is opting for Wednesday or Thursday of the
following week, and so long as he provides this statement to Ms. Price at the
time of her period of Wednesday visitation, one week in advance, he will have
the option of exercising either Wednesday or Thursday, depending upon and in
order to accommodate his work schedule.
15. Under the Order now in effect, there is no specific schedule for Father's
visitation, but by exchange of correspondence, the parties agreed upon an every-other-
weekend schedule. There exists no specific agreement regarding weekdays and there
is no Order now in effect, providing for weekdays with Father.
16. Mr. Rayhart did not provide any advance notice whatsoever, whether in
writing or otherwise, of his intention to visit with Stephanie during a weekday evening
the week beginning September 3D, 1996.
17. Mr. Rayhart did not provide any advance notice whatsoever, whether in
writing or otherwise, of his intention to visit with Stephanie during a weekday evening
the week beginning October 7, 1996.
18. Since the most recent hearing, Mr. Rayhart has exercised visitation with
the child during the customary every other weekend, with this having occurred the
weekend of October 5 and 6, 1996, beginning Friday evening and ending on Sunday
evening.
19. Despite his failure to provide advance notice, Mr. Rayhart appeared at Ms.
Price's residence on Wednesday evening, October 9, 1996 and exercised visitation
during that weekday evening.
20. Terri Price remains ready and available to facilitate regular exchanges of
Stephanie with her Father according to a set schedule and looks to the Court to set
forth such a schedule in order to have the parties clearly advised as to appropriate
expectations.
21. Terri Price has not violated any Court Orders, or even any agreements of
the parties.
WHEREFORE, for the above-referenced reasons, Plaintiff respectfully requests
of this court that it dismiss the petition without need for a hearing, since the petition
alleges a schedule which did not exist and therefore no violation of an order occurred.
The Petitioner further requests that in connection with the entry of an overall custody
Order in this case, the Order provide primary physical custody with mother,
alternating holidays between the parties, alternating weekends with father from Friday
evening to Sunday evening, commencing the weekend of October 19 and 20, 1996, and
one weekday evening per week from 4:00 p.m to 8:00 p.m., to occur on Wednesdays,
unless father has provided one week's advance written notice that he intends to
exercise this period on the following Thursday instead of Wednesday.
DATE: lO\lb\ %
Respectfully submitted,
~
JACOBSEN & MILKES
52 E. High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 249-6427
Attorney No. 30130
I hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing 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.
Dated:
I b\ IIPI ql.9
L' //1,
.f;D,14r '1 {1?.Af (
TERRI PRICE/'
"
c
C'
JACOBSEN & MILKES
52 East High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013-3085
Samuel W. Milkes
Andrea C. Jacobsen
Tel 717 249-6427
F8lt 717 249-8427
July 16, 1996
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, P A 17011
Re: Price v. Rayhart
Dear Mr. Pollock:
~
I'm writing to confirm the arrangement which has been agreed to, informally
modifying the term under the current order for the Wednesday time Gary Rayhart is
with Stephanie. Currently, Mr. Rayhart is to have Wednesday evening visits during
the week that he does not have partial custody, as is the case for Ms. Price. So long
as Mr. Rayhart provides Ms. Price, in writing, a statement as to whether he is opting
for Wednesday or Thursday of the following week, and so long as he provides this
statement to Ms. Price at the time of her period of Wednesday visitation, one week in
advance, he will have the option of exercising either Wednesday or Thursday,
depending upon and in order to accommodate his work schedule.
I want to reinforce my client's position as to what occurred in the past. Mr.
Rayhart never spoke with Ms. Price about any proposed modification. He mentioned
to her brother during a Saturday exchange that he would be working the following
Wednesday and wanted to visit Thursday instead. Based upon this communication
through the brother, Ms. Price altered visitation that week. She was never informed
that this would be a regular event and no formal request was ever made to change the
arrangement from Wednesdays. She had no idea that Mr. Rayhart would not be
showing up for his next Wednesday visit but instead would be expecting to visit on
Thursday. We find it rather odd and suspect that if Mr. Rayhart thought therE! was
an agreement for Thursdays, why would he have shown up a little past the Wednesday
visitation time, to notify Ms. Price that he intended to visit the next day, Thursday?
In any event, this agreement should resolve the situation.
Very truly yours,
1
SWM\jlc
cc: Terri Price
(corr)0716poll. pri
(' JACOBSEN & MILKES
52 East High Street
Carlisle, P A 17013-3085
(
Samuel W. Milkes
Andrea C. Jacobsen
Tel 717 249-6427
Fax 717249-8427
August 23, 1996
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, P A 17011
Re: Price v. Rayhart
Dear Dan:
First of all, I wanted to make sure that you have a copy of the enclosed Order,
which I obtained on Friday. With Terri having primary physical custody, and with a
transfer of Stephanie's physical custody otherwise, under the prior order, being
scheduled for this Sunday, August 25, we are proposing that Gary have from Sunday
to Monday evening with Stephanie and that Stephanie then be returned to Terri at
that time in order to start school on Tuesday the 27th. Stephanie should be returned
by 5:00 p.m. on Monday in order to have some time to get ready for her first day of
school the following morning. Thereafter, be!Pnn;ngthe weekend of September 7 and
8, and also including the weekend of September 21 and 22, we are proposing that"Bary
have Stephanie every other weekend from Friday evening to Sunday evening. A 5:00
p.m. time of exchange on each of those days would make sense to me although we are
receptive to suggestions about a different time if this is inconsistent with his
employment schedule or some other scheduling problems. If Mr. Rayhart wishes to
propose a weekday evening on the weeks during which he will not have a weekend of
partial custody, we would be receptive to a suggestion on this. Our only concern, of
course, would be that Stephanie cannot be getting home too late, given her school
schedule.
Finally, I want to address the situation that occurred this past week. Terri
reports to me that Gary came to her residence on Wednesday, August 21st to say that
due to his work schedule, he would be coming on Thursday, August 22nd, to pick up
Stephanie. Although this manner of rescheduling is inconsistent with the one-week
advance written notice that had previously been agreed upon, Terri agreed to this
revision and Mr. Rayhart left to go to work. At the time, Terri had forgotten that she
was scheduled for an appointment at Alexander Spring Rehab for work on her arm,
which was injured at her employment. Since there was no one at the home to leave
Stephanie with on Thursday, Terri had to take Stephanie with her to the appointment
at Alexander Spring Rehab on Thursday afternoon and she did not return until
slightly after 4:00 p.m. on Thursday. Stephanie was available from this time on for
Gary to pick her up but unfortunately, both before and after the Thursday time, Terri
had no way of getting a hold of Gary and she was therefore not able to meet the
"'''l"'-~' .
(
(
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
August 23, 1996
Page Two
. revised time. We regret that this development occurred but would suggest situations
such as this emphasize why there needs to be advance notice of changed days, so that
they can be thought through and so that problems of this sort can be avoided. I have
emphasized to Terri that she needs to be careful in the future to avoid developments
such as this and I would suggest of your client that if he is able to keep Terri notified
as to how she can reach him, then these problems might also be avoided when they do
arise with short notice.
Very truly yours,
SWM\jlc
Enclosure
cc: Terri Price
(corr)0823poll.pri
-
V.
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: NO. 94-2016 CML TERM
94-2158 CML TERM
: CUSTODY
TERRI L. PRICE,
Plaintiff
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Jennifer L. Coyle, hereby certifY that a copy of the Plaintiff's Answer to
Defendant's Petition to Find Plaintiff in Contempt in the above captioned matter was
duly served upon the Defendant's attorney, Daniel Pollock, Esq., by depositing the
same in the U.S. Mail, on October 16, 1996, addressed as follows:
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, PA 17011
I hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing 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.
Dated: 10 1](.0 jq (0
.
schedules take precedence over usually scheduled custody or partial custody.
6) Father shall be entitled to two weeks over the summer. providing he gives
at least 30 days advance written notice of the weeks he intends to exercise this option.
BY THE COURT:
J.
v.
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: NO. 94-2016 CML TERM
94-2158 CML TERM
: CUSTODY
TERRI L. PRICE,
Plaintiff
i
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
PI...AIl'I'l'J..l4'F"S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT~e l'tl'UUON
TO FIND PLAIN'l'll"l" IN CONTEMPT
COMES NOW, the Plaintiff in the above-referenced action, Terri L. Price, by
her attorney, Samuel W. Milkes, Esq., JACOBSEN & MILKES, and responds to the
Defendant's Pe~ition to Find the Plaintiff in Contempt as follows:
1. With short notice to the Plaintiff, Terri L. Price, the Plaintitrs mother
notified Plaintiff that she would be moving to Shippensburg, Pennsylvania due to
changed job opportunities.
2. This placed Plaintiff in the position of suddenly having to find new
housing; a circumstance which she had not expected to be faced with until her planned
move to a mobile home was arranged.
3. Because Plaintiff was unable to pay the $525 monthly rent on her
mother's rental house, in order to remain residing in that house, Plaintiff located a
new residence and began residing in this residence on October 1, 1996.
4. Plaintiff's new residence is located at 50 Mountain Road, Carlisle,
Pennsylvania, and has a monthly rental amount of $220. The residence is a half of a
double home, located in an attractive residential community.
5. Ms. Price had intended to telephone Mr, Rayhart at his work, in order to
notify him of the change of address and location where he could exchange visitation
for the weekend of October 5 and 6 but because Mr. Rayhart came to her residence on
the evening of October 3, the discussion occurred at that time instead.
6. As had been true for the Defendant, Mr. Rayhart, the Plaintiff was under
the mistaken impression that she could leave her daughter in the Carlisle School
District even if she moved out of the district, so long as she continued to transport her
daughter on a daily basis to school.
7. The Plaintiff learned through advice of her counsel and through school
officials that her daughter, Stephanie, would not be able to remain in the Carlisle
School District because of the change of residence.
8. Plaintiff has enrolled Stephanie in the Middlesex Elementary School, a
school which the child Stephanie is now attending.
9. Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the change of schooling location. In
the discussion that took place between the two of them, Defendant did not raise any
objections to this change of schooling and in fact stated that he was pleased that the
daughter would now be attending schooling which allowed the daughter to be bused
to school rather than transported by others, considering he had raised some objections
to the prior transportation arrangements.
10. The current custody order in effect provides primary custody to Terri
Price in order to facilitate the child's enrollment in school and does not set forth any
specific partial custody schedule.
11. As was testified to and argued at the September 30, 1996 hearing and as
has been testified to at prior hearings, significant disputes have occurred in the past
when the schedules are not specifically set forth in very clear terms, because Father
-
orten appears at the residence without advanco notico, oxpoctillg then and there to
exercise visitation. For example, undor tho curronL sLatulI quo, Lhoreforo, Lhe parties
have apparently developed differenL undorstnndlngll os to what the exchange
arrangement is.
12. A letter entered into evldonco aL the SopLomber 30 hearing, and attached
hereto, dated August 23, 1996 suggesLed 0 proposod Bchedulo for Father Lo exercise
visitation pending further Order of CourL or agroemont of Lhe parties. Because the
Court's Order did not set forth 0 spoclfic schedule for Lhis purpose, Mother
immediately took the initiative, Lhrough her aUorney, Lo propose 0 schedule. The
letter proposed as follows:
With TerTi having primary physlcol custody, and wiLh 0 transfer of Stephanie's
physicol custody otherwise, under the prior order, being scheduled for this
Sunday, August 25, we arc proposing Lhat Gary have from Sunday to Monday
evening with SLephanie and Lhat SLephanie Lhen be returned to Terri at that
time in order to start school on Tuosday the 27th. Stephanie should be
returned by 5:00 p.m. on Monday In order to have some time to get ready for
her fU'st day of school tho following morning. Thereafter, beginning the
weekend of September 7 and 8, and also including the weekend of September
21 and 22, we are proposing Lhat Gary have SLephanie every other weekend
from Friday evening to Sunday evening. A 5:00 p.m. time of exchange on each
of those days would make sense Lo me although we are receptive to suggestions
about a different time if Lhis Is inconslstont with his employment schedule or
some other scheduling problems. If Mr. Rayhart wishes to propose a
weekday evening on the weeks during which he will not have a
weekend of partial custody, we would be receptive to a suggestion on
this. Our only concern, of course, would be that Stephanie cannot be
getting home too late, given her school schedule. (Emphasis added).
13. In 0 subsequenL Lelephono conversaL!on between counsel, Father's time with
Stephanie was enlarged during the firsL week of school only. Thereafter, no specific
agreement was over reduced to writing, alLhough Father continued to exercise every-
other weekend vislLatlon.
I'
I
; ~
~
1':
1\:...'
14. Under a prior agreement reached by the parties, and documented in the
attached letter of Mother's counsel dated July 16, 1996, the parties reached an
agreement in order to facilitate Mr. Rayhart's weekday evening partial custody, in
order to accommodate his work schedule. This weekday visitation was provided for in
a prior Court Order, superseded by the Order transferring primary custody to Mother.
Since Mr. Rayhart's work schedule fluctuated from week to week, it was agreed by the
parties that Mr. Rayhart would provide Ms. Price one week's advance notice, in
writing, as to when his weekday evening visitation would be, either on a Wednesday
or Thursday, depending upon his schedule. The letter included the following
discussion:
I'm writing to confirm the arrangement which has been agreed to,
informally modifying the term under the current order for the Wednesday time
Gary Rayhart is with Stephanie. Currently, Mr. Rayhart is to have Wednesday
evening visits during the week that he does not have partial custody, as is the
case for Ms. Price. So long as Mr. Rayhart provides Ms. Price, in writing, a
statement as to whether he is opting for Wednesday or Thursday of the
following week, and so long as he provides this statement to Ms. Price at the
time of her period of Wednesday visitation, one week in advance, he will have
the option of exercising either Wednesday or Thursday, depending upon and in
order to accommodate his work schedule.
15. Under the Order now in effect, there is no specific schedule for Father's
visitation, but by exchange of correspondence, the parties agreed upon an every-other-
weekend schedule. There exists no specific agreement regarding weekdays and there
is no Order now in effect, providing for weekdays with Father.
16. Mr. Rayhart did not provide any advance notice whatsoever, whether in
writing or otherwise, of his intention to visit with Stephanie during a weekday evening
the week beginning September 30, 1996.
17. Mr. Rayhart did not provide any advance notice whatsoever, whether in
-
writing or otherwise, of his intention to visit with Stephanie during a weekday evening
the week beginning October 7, 1996.
18. Since the most recent hearing, Mr. Rayhart has exercised visitation with
the child during the customary every other weekend, with this having occurred the
weekend of October 5 and 6, 1996, beginning Friday evening and ending on Sunday
evening.
19. Despite his failure to provide advance notice, Mr. Rayhart appeared at Ms.
Price's residence on Wednesday evening, October 9, 1996 and exercised visitation
during that weekday evening.
20. Terri Price remains ready and available to facilitate regular exchanges of
Stephanie with her Father according to a set schedule and looks to the Court to set
forth such a schedule in order to have the parties clearly advised as to appropriate
expectations.
21. Terri Price has not violated any Court Orders, or even any agreements of
the parties.
WHEREFORE, for the above-referenced reasons, Plaintiff respectfully requests
of this court that it dismiss the petition without need for a hearing, since the petition
alleges a schedule which did not exist and therefore no violation of an order occurred.
The Petitioner further requests that in connection with the entry of an overall custody
Order in this case, the Order provide primary physical custody with mother,
alternating holidays between the parties, alternating weekends with father from Friday
evening to Sunday evening, commencing the weekend of October 19 and 20, 1996, and
one weekday evening per week from 4:00 p.m to 8:00 p.m., to occur on Wednesdays,
r.'~ ~ . -",............
unleBS father has provided one week's advance written notice that he intends to
exercise this period on the following Thursday instead of Wednesday.
DATE: lO\lb \ ~
Respectfully submitted,
BY: Samuel . Milkes, Esq.
JACOBSEN & MILKES
52 E. High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 249.6427
Attorney No. 30130
..
i'
~:.-:r:;.: ~"~ ~
I hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing 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.
Dated:
I b\, wI qiP
L'ri?
..!fj//U( '1 /lUff
TERRI PRICE/ ~-
c
C',
JACOBSEN & MlLKES
52 East High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013.3085
Tel 717 249-6427
Fo.x 717 249-8427
Samuel W. ~ll1kes
Andrea C. Jacobsen
July 16, 1996
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, PA 17011
Re: Price v. Rayhart
Dear Mr. Pollock:
I'm writing to confirm the arrangement which has been agreed to, informally
modifying the term under the current order for the Wednesday time Gary Rayhart is
with Stephanie. Currently, Mr. Rayhart is to have Wednesday evening visits during
the week that he does not have partial custody, as is the case for Ms. Price. So long
as Mr. Rayhart provides Ms. Price, in writing, a statement as to whether he is opting
for Wednesday or Thursday of the following week, and so long as he provides this
statement to Ms. Price at the time of her period of Wednesday visitation, one week in
advance, he will have the option of exercising either Wednesday or Thursday,
depending upon and in order to accommodate his work schedule.
I want to reinforce my client's position as to what occurred in the past. Mr.
Rayhart never spoke with Ms. Price about any proposed modification. He mentioned
to her brother during a Saturday exchange that he would be working the following
Wednesday and wanted to visit Thursday instead. Based upon this communication
through the brother, Ms. Price altered visitation that week. She was never informed
that this would be a regular event and no formal request was ever made to cJ?ange the
arrangement Crom Wednesdays. She had no idea that Mr. Rayhart would not be
showing up for his next Wednesday visit but instead would be expecting to visit on
Thursday. We find it rather odd and suspect that if Mr. Rayhart thought ther~ was
an agreement for Thursdays, why would he have shown up a little past the Wednesday
visitation time, to notify Ms. Price that he intended to visit the next day, Thursday?
In any event, this agreement should resolve the situation.
Very truly yours,
;;
SWM\jlc
cc: Terri Price
(corr)0716poll. pri
. (' jACOBSEN & MILKES
52 East High Street
Carlisle, P A 17013-3085
(
,
Samuel W. Milkes
Andrea C. Jacobsen
Tel 717 249-6427
Fax 717 249-8427
August 23, 1996
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, PA 17011
Re: Price v. Rayhart
Dear Dan:
First of all, I wanted to make sure that you have a copy of the enclosed Order,
which I obtained on Friday. With Terri having primary physical custody, and with a
transfer of Stephanie's physical custody otherwise, under the prior order, being
scheduled for this Sunday, August 25, we are proposing that Gary have from Sunday
to Monday evening with Stephanie and that Stephanie then be returned to Terri at
that time in order to start school on Tuesday the 27th. Stephanie should be returned
by 5:00 p.m. on Monday in order to have some time to get ready for her first day of
school the following morning. Thereafter, beginning the weekend of September 7 and
8, and also including the weekend of September 21 and 22, we are proposing that"Etary
have Stephanie every other weekend from Friday evening to Sunday evening. A 5:00
p.m. time of exchange on each of those days would make sense to me although we are
receptive to suggestions about a different time if this is inconsistent with his
employment schedule or some other scheduling problems. If Mr. Rayhart wishes to
propose a weekday evening on the weeks during which he will not have a weekend of
partial custody, we would be receptive to a suggestion on this. Our only concern, of
course, would be that Stephanie cannot be getting home too late, given her school
schedule.
Finally, I want to address the situation that occurred this past week. Terri
reports to me that Gary came to her residence on Wednesday, August 21st to say that
due to his work schedule, he would be eoming on Thursday, August 22nd, to pick up
Stephanie. Although this manner of rescheduling is inconsistent with the one-week
advance written notice that had previously been agreed upon, Terri agreed to this
revision and Mr. Rayhart left to go to work. At the time, Terri had forgotten that she
was scheduled for an appointment at Alexander Spring Rehab for work on her arm,
which was injured at her employment. Since there was no one at the home to leave
Stephanie with on Thursday, Terri had to take Stephanie with her to the appointment
at Alexander Spring Rehab on Thursday afternoon and she did not return until
slightly after 4:00 p.m. on Thursday. Stephanie was available from this time on for
Gary to pick her up but unfortunately, both before and after the Thursday time, Terri
had no way of getting a hold of Gary and she was therefore not able to meet the
1tiW....
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
August 23, 1996
Page Two
(
...'.,";..._,.",---
(' .
.
. revised time. We regret that this development occurred but would suggest situations
such as this emphasize why there needs to be advance notice of changed days, so that
they can be thought through and so that problems of this sort can be avoided. I have
emphasized to Terri that she needs to be careful in the future to avoid developments
such as this and I would suggest of your client that if he is able to keep Terri notified
as to how she can reach him, then these problems might also be avoided when they do
arise with short notice.
SWM\jlc
Enclosure
cc: Terri Price
(corr )0823poll. pri
Very truly yours,
.
TERRI L. PRICE,
Plaintiff
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
.
: NO. 94.2016 CML TERM
94-2158 CML TERM
: CUSTODY
CERTIFICATE OF SERv:u:L~
I, Jennifer L. Coyle, hereby certify that a copy of the Plaintiff's Answer to
Defendant's Petition to Find Plaintiff in Contempt in the above captioned matter was
duly served upon the Defendant's attorney, Daniel Pollock, Esq., by depositing the
same in the U.S. Mail, on October 16, 1996, addressed as follows:
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, PA 17011
I hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing 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.
Dated: IOj/(ojq (0
QnQJULJ) t?nJ1QQ )
~m~-
schedules take precedence over usually scheduled custody or partial custody.
6) Father shall be entitled to two weeks over the summer, providing he gives
at least 30 days advance written notice of the weeks he intends to exercise this option.
BY THE COURT:
J.
TERRI L. PRICE,
Plaintiff
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: NO. 94-2016 CML TERM
94-2158 CML TERM
V.
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
: CUSTODY
PLAINTIFF'S ANSWER TO DEFENDANT'S PETITION
TO FIND PLAINTIFF IN CONTEMPT
COMES NOW, the Plaintiff in the above-referenced action, Terri L. Price, by
her attorney, Samuel W. Milkes, Esq., JACOBSEN & MILKES, and responds to the
Defendant's Petition to Find the Plaintiff in Contempt as follows:
1. With short notice to the Plaintiff, Terri L. Price, the Plaintiff's mother
notified Plaintiff that she would be moving to Shippensburg, Pennsylvania due to
changed job opportunities.
2. This placed Plaintiff in the position of suddenly having to find new
housing; a circumstance which she had not expected to be faced with until her planned
move to a mobile home was arranged.
3. Because Plaintiff was unable to pay the $525 monthly rent on her
mother's rental house, in order to remain residing in that house, Plaintiff located a
new residence and began residing in this residence on October 1, 1996.
4. Plaintiff's new residence is located at 50 Mountain Road, Carlisle,
Pennsylvania, and has a monthly rental amount of $220. The residence is a half of a
double home, located in an attractive residential community.
5. Ms. Price had intended to telephone Mr. Rayhart at his work, in order to
notify him of the change of address and location where he could exchange visitation
for the weekend of October 5 and 6 but because Mr. Rayhart came to her residence on
the evening of October 3, the discussion occurred at that time instead.
6. As had been true for the Defendant, Mr. Rayhart, the Plaintiff was under
the mistaken impression that she could leave her daughter in the Carlisle School
District even if she moved out of the district, so long as she continued to transport her
daughter on a daily basis to school.
7. 'l'he Plaintiff learned through advice of her counsel and through school
officials that her daughter, Stephanie, would not be able to remain in the Carlisle
School District because of the change of residence.
8. Plaintiff has enrolled Stephanie in the Middlesex Elementary School, a
school which the child Stephanie is now attending.
9. Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the change of schooling location. In
the discussion that took place between the two of them, Defendant did not raise any
objections to this change of schooling and in fact stated that he was pleased that the
daughter would now be attending schooling which allowed the daughter to be bused
to school rather than transported by others, considering he had raised some objections
to the prior transportation arrangements.
10. The current custody order in effect provides primary custody to Terri
Price in order to facilitate the child's enrollment in school and does not set forth any
specific partial custody schedule.
11. As was testified to and argued at the September 30, 1996 hearing and as
has been testified to at prior hearings, significant disputes have occurred in the past
when the schedules are not specifically set forth in very clear terms, because Father
often appears at the residence without advance notice, expecting then and there to
exercise visitation. For example, under the current status quo, therefore, the parties
have apparently developed different understandings as to what the exchange
arrangement is.
12. A letter entered into evidence at the September 30 hearing, and attached
hereto, dated August 23, 1996 suggested a proposed schedule for Father to exercise
visitation pending further Order of Court or agreement of the parties. Because the
Court's Order did not set forth a specific schedule for this purpose, Mother
immediately took the initiative, through her attorney, to propose a schedule. The
letter proposed as follows:
With Terri having primary physical custody, and with a transfer of Stephanie's
physical custody otherwise, under the prior order, being scheduled for this
Sunday, August 25. we are proposing that Gary have from Sunday to Monday
evening with Slo-:~l~T1ie and that Stephanie then be returned to Terri at that
time in order to start school on Tuesday the 27th. Stephanie should be
returned by 5:00 p.m. on Monday in order to have some time to get ready for
her first day of school the following morning. Thereafter, beginning the
weekend of September 7 and 8, and also including the weekend of September
21 and 22, we are proposing that Gary have Stephanie every other weekend
from Friday evening to Sunday evening. A 5:00 p.m. time of exchange on each
of those days would make sense to me although we are receptive to suggestions
about a different time if this is inconsistent with his employment schedule or
some other scheduling problems. If Mr. Rayhart wishes to propose a
weekday evening on the weeks during which he will not have a
weekend of partial custody, we would be receptive to a suggestion on
this. Our only concern, of course, would be that Stephanie cannot be
getting home too late, given her school schedule. (Emphasis added).
13. In a subsequent telephone conversation between counsel, Father's time with
Stephanie was enlarged during the first week of school only. Thereafter, no specific
agreement was ever reduced to writing, although Father continued to exercise every-
other weekend visitation.
..u
14. Under a prior agreement reached by the parties, and documented in the
attached letter of Mother's counsel dated July 16, 1996, the parties reached an
agreement in order to facilitate Mr. Rayhart's weekday evening partial custody, in
order to accommodate his work schednle. This weekday visitation was provided for in
a prior Court Order, superseded by the Order transferring primary custody to Mother.
Since Mr. Rayhart's work schedule fluctuated from week to week, it was agreed by the
parties that Mr. Rayhart would provide Ms. Price one week's advance notice, in
writing, as to when his weekday evening visitation would be, either on a Wednesday
or Thursday, depending upon his schedule. The letter included the following
discussion:
I'm writing to confirm the arrangement which has been agreed to,
informally modifying the term under the current order for the Wednesday time
Gary Rayhart is with Stephanie. Currently, Mr. Rayhart is to have Wednesday
evening visits during the week that he does not have partial custody, as is the
case for Ms. Price. So long as Mr. Rayhart provides Ms. Price, in writing, a
statement as to whether he is opting for Wednesday or Thursday of the
following week, and so long as he provides this statement to Ms. Price at the
time of her period of Wednesday visitation, one week in advance, he will have
the option of exercising either Wednesday or Thursday, depending upon and in
order to accommodate his work schedule.
15. Under the Order now in effect, there is no specific schedule for Father's
visitation, but by exchange of correspondence, the parties agreed upon an every-other-
weekend schedule. There exists no specific agreement regarding weekdays and there
is no Order now in effect, providing for weekdays with Father.
16. Mr. Rayhart did not provide any advance notice whatsoever, whether in
writing or otherwise, of his intention to visit with Stephanie during a weekday evening
the week beginning September 30, 1996.
17. Mr. Rayhart did not provide any advance notice whatsoever, whether in
.
writing or otherwise, of his intention to visit with Stephanie during a weekday evening
the week beginning October 7, 1996.
18. Since the most recent hearing, Mr. Rayhart has exercised visitation with
the child during the customary every other weekend, with this having occurred the
weekend of October 5 and 6, 1996, beginning Friday evening and ending on Sunday
evening.
19. Despite his failure to provide advance notice, Mr. Rayhart appeared at Ms.
Price's residence on Wednesday evening, October 9, 1996 and exercised visitation
during that weekday evening.
20. Terri Price remains ready and available to facilitate regular exchanges of
Stephanie with her Father according to a set schedule and looks to the Court to set
forth such a schedule in order to have the parties clearly advised as to appropriate
expectations.
21. Terri Price has not violated any Court Orders, or even any agreements of
the parties.
WHEREFORE, for the above-referenced reasons, Plaintiff respectfully requests
of this court that it dismiss the petition without need for a hearing, since the petition
alleges a schedule which did not exist and therefore no violation of an order occurred.
The Petitioner further requests that in connection with the entry of an overall custody
Order in this case, the Order provide primary physical custody with mother,
alternatinr holidays between the parties, alternating weekends with father from Friday
evening to Sunday evening, commencing the weekend of October 19 and 20, 1996, and
one weekday evening per week from 4:00 p.m to 8:00 p.m., to occur on Wednesdays,
.
unless father has provided one week's advance written notice that he intends to
exercise this period on the following Thursday instead of Wednesday.
DATE: lO\lb\ %
Respectfully submitted,
BY: Samuel . Milkes, Esq.
JACOBSEN & MILKES
52 E. High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 249-6427
Attorney No. 30130
.
I hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing 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.
Dated:
Ib\llP1qLP
,/. (/,1
4,,/u,' t/}0r (
TERRI PRICE/ --
c
,
C'
JACOBSEN & MILKES
52 East High Street
Carlisle. P A 17013-3085
Samuel W. Milkes
Andrea C. Jacobsen
Tel 717249-6427
Fax 717 249-8427
July 16, 1996
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, PA 17011
Re: Price v. Rayhart
Dear Mr. Pollock:
I'm writing to confirm. the arrangement which has been agreed to, informally
modifying the term under the current order for the Wednesday time Gary Rayhart is
with Stephanie. Currently, Mr. Rayhart is to have Wednesday evening visits during
the week that he does not have partial custody, as is the case for Ms. Price. So long
as Mr. Rayhart provides Ms. Price, in writing, a statement as to whether he is opting
for Wednesday or Thursday of the following week, and so long as he provides this
statement to Ms. Price at the time of her period of Wednesday visitation, one week in
advance, he will have the option of exercising either Wednesday or Thursday,
depending upon and in order to accommodate his work schedule.
I want to reinforce my client's position as to what occurred in the past. Mr.
Rayhart never spoke with Ms. Price about any proposed modification. He mentioned
to her brother during a Saturday exchange that he would be working the following
Wednesday and wanted to visit Thursday instead. Based upon this communication
through the brother, Ms. Price altered visitation that week. She was never informed
that this would be a regular event and no formal request was ever made to change the
arrangement from Wednesdays. She had no idea that Mr. Rayhart would not be
showing up for his next Wednesday visit but instead would be expecting to visit on
Thursday. We find it rather odd and suspect that if Mr. Rayhart thought therE! was
an agreement for Thursdays, why would he have shown up a little past the Wednesday
visitation time, to notify Ms. Price that he intended to visit the next day, Thursday?
In any event, this agreement should resolve the situation.
Very truly yours,
1
SWM\jlc
cc: Terri Price
(corr)0716poll.pri
.
(' JACOBSEN & MD..KES
52 East High Street
Carlisle, P A 17013-3085
(
Tel 717249-6427
Fax 717 249-8427
Samuel W. Milkes
Andrea C. Jacobsen
August 23, 1996
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, PA 17011
Re: Price v. Rayhart
Dear Dan:
First of all, I wanted to make sure that you have a copy of the enclosed Order,
which I obtained on Friday. With Terri having primary physical custody, and with a
transfer of Stephanie's physical custody otherwise, under the prior order, being
scheduled for this Sunday, August 25, we are proposing that Gary have from Sunday
to Monday evening with Stephanie and that Stephanie then be returned to Terri at
that time in order to start school on Tuesday the 27th. Stephanie should be returned
by 5:00 p.m. on Monday in order to have some time to get ready for her first day of
school the following morning. Thereafter, beginn;ng the weekend of September 7 and
8, and also including the weekend of September 21 and 22, we are proposing that"Gary
have Stephanie every other weekend from Friday evening to Sunday evening. A 5:00
p.m. time of exchange on each of those days would make sense to me although we are
receptive to suggestions about a different time if this is inconsistent with his
employment schedule or some other scheduling problems. If Mr. Rayhart wishes to
propose a weekday evening on the weeks during which he will not have a weekend of
partial custody, we would be receptive to a suggestion on this. Our only concern, of
course, would be that Stephanie cannot be getting home too late, given her school
schedule.
Finally, I want to address the situation that occurred this past week. Terri
reports to me that Gary came to her residence on Wednesday, August 21st to say that
due to his work schedule, he would be coming on Thursday, August 22nd, to pick up
Stephanie. Although this manner of rescheduling is inconsistent with the one-week
advance written notice that had previously been agreed upon, Terri agreed to this
revision and Mr. Rayhart left to go to work. At the time, Terri had forgotten that she
was scheduled for an appointment at Alexander Spring Rehab for work on her arm,
which was injured at her employment. Since there was no one at the home to leave
Stephanie with on Thursday, Terri had to take Stephanie with her to the appointment
at Alexander Spring Rehab on Thursday afternoon and she did not return until
slightly after 4:00 p.m. on Thursday. Stephanie was available from this time on for
Gary to pick her up but unfortunately, both before and after the Thursday time, Terri
had no way of getting a hold of Gary and she was therefore not able to meet the
(
<'
.
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
August 23, 1996
Page Two
. revised time. We regret that this development occurred but would suggest situations
such as this emphasize why there needs to be advance notice of changed days, so that
they can be thought through and so that problems of this sort can be avoided. I have
emphasized to Terri that she needs to be careful in the future to avoid developments
such as this and I would suggest of your client that if he is able to keep Terri notified
as to how she can reach him, then these problems might also be avoided when they do
arise with short notice.
Very truly yours,
SWM\jlc
Enclosure
cc: Terri Price
(corr)0823poll.pri
.
TERRI L. PRICE,
Plaintiff
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
: NO. 94-2016 CML TERM
94-2158 CML TERM
: CUSTODY
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
V.
GARY A. RAYHART,
Defendant
I, Jennifer L. Coyle, hereby certify that a copy of the Plaintiff's Answer to
Defendant's Petition to Find Plaintiff in Contempt in the above captioned matter was
" duly served upon the Defendant's attorney, Daniel Pollock, Esq., by depositing the
same in the U.S. Mail, on October 16, 1996, addressed as follows:
Daniel Pollock, Esq.
3105 Old Gettysburg Road
Camp Hill, PA 17011
I hereby verify that the statements made in the foregoing 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.
Dated: 10 I J(.a /q &;
~::::enoi~tl_~ f?nillQ )
~0@~0 -
-
[;;;
~
...,
......
~f-.<
. i,"<
Y',.
. -
.
.
. .
I
...
,
I'
"
.
~~.::,~~h~.:~;~:~~q'!~~~:;~~~~~j"?,J~;':;1~,t<~1'~~~">:.--
,;"',,,j
~._.,,:.t . ,'".
. -'"
..:
JACOBSEN & MILKES
S2 East High Slrccl
Carlislc, PA 17013-308S
(,
\
.... .'
<:"
\
)
,
/
:: .., ",
-.' ~ ~~
~ ~ , '. .
DANIEL POLLOCK ESQ
3105 OLD GETTYSBURG ROAD
CAMP HILL PA 17011
.;.4,,';"'.:c::A.~r,;;;~i,"~"''-~l> t
~r'~_"",",",,~"'''''''''''''''''''''"'_.--'.'-''-'''''''-------'-''-''---_-\_<''''''''''',.....,-.,....-....'"
.
.
.
..
"
\.
_.~._-
.'
-.
~....,..... Jr;',.,',
-"t'. ,.
....-.-... l....__~
.
.
. .
~
,
,.
,:.~-;-..'c:'-/:};::_;'0'-.-)j\';~\~ir~ftf1;~:~I{f:~~~~~~t1~:f:'?~-l!~~':tf~1'tt~~$'~~~~;;y~:t:f~~B}\~~",,~~~_;ll.~;-{~,~~~,lt.~}~-~~-._-~
JACOBSEN & MILKES
52 Easl High Streel
Carlisle, PA 17013.3085
t..::C--=~~:;:-I~~)'~:~ ZI1~'::;';~~:' .:';-; j
#,r ::: ~ =:3 2: :
'r .':.;:" -. -.
........... .
....:~,.:1
B" ~~;:~~~ tt f: pr: ':;....~G( :
"
'/,
JAconSEN & MILKES
52 EAST HIGH STH EET
CAIlUS!.E PA 17013
J
,)
.~~
;J
,'J
'.,,'~
,
- i'~
11
d
'I
.h.
:<<::,
"
.
.
~~""_A';''''''''~;';';:;''l.\''''''''''-~''---'~---''''''''---'-----'~''"''- ,'". -. - ^"
..____,.~__.~.""._.~.....'._*.m~......;u__d"'__""._-,____~
--
.
. .
, ,
\
.
-4 -'c.
...."...-
TERRI L. PRICE
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V,
,
,
GARY A. RAYHART
,
,
.
.
,
.
NO. 2016 CIVIL 1994 ~
GARY A, RAY HART
V.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
IN RE:
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
TERRI L. PRICE
NO, 2158 CIVIL 1994
CIVIL ACTION - CUSTODY
CUSTODY
AND NOW,
BEFORE: SHEELY. P,J,
ORDER OF COURT
this G~ay of NOVEMBER, 1996,
the following
Custody Order is entered regarding the parties' child Stephanie
Bea Rayhart, modifying all previous orders as follows:
1. The parties shall share legal custody.
2. The mother, Terry L, Price, shall have primary physical
custody,
3. The father, Gary A, Rayhart, shall have partial custody
of the child every other weekend, beginning Friday at 6:00 p,m.
until Sunday 6:00 p.m" effective November 8, 1996. The father
shall also have partial custody during the week (Monday-Friday)
on the day that he has off from work. On the day that he has off
from work, he shall pick up the child from school and return her
to the mother's residence at 8:00 p,m, If school is not in
session on that day, he shall pick the child up at 12:00 p.m. at
the mother's residence and return the child to the mother's
residence at 8:00 p.m.
~
4, The father shall provide the mother with his work
schedule in writing every Wednesday,
5, The parties shall alternate holidays as follows:
a. The father shall have custody of the child on
Thanksgiving, 1996, from 9:00 a,m, until 7:00 p.m.;
b. The mother shall have the child on Christmas Eve, 1996,
from 6:00 p,m. until 1:00 p,m, on Christmas Day; the
father shall have the child from 1:00 p,m, until 7:00
p.m.
c. The father shall have the child on Easter, 1997, from
9:00 a.m, until 7:00 p,m,;
d. The mother shall have the child on the Fourth of July,
1997, from 9:00 a,m, until 7:00 p,m,;
e. The father shall have the child on Labor Day, 1997, from
9:00 a,m. until 7:00 p,m,
If the parent already has custody of the child during a holiday,
the time limits are not applicable, except for Christmas, The
parties shall follow the Christmas schedule as noted above,
alternating each year so that next year, the father will have the
child on Christmas Eve from 6:00 p.m, until 1:00 p,m. on
Christmas Day,
6. The father shall have custody of the child for three
weeks during the summer months of June through August. Two of
these weeks may be consecutive, The father shall give the mother
at least six week's notice prior to exercising his custody for
these weeks.
7. If either the father or the mother wish to vary from
this schedule in any manner, that party must make a request to
the other party in writing at least five days in advance.
8, The parties shall keep each other informed of their
addresses and telephone numbers,
9. Neither party shall move out of a 50 mile radius of
Carlisle without written agreement of the parties or Order of
Court,
10. The mother and father shall notify the other of all
medical care the child receives while in that parent's care.
Each parent shall notify the other immediately of medical
emergencies which arise while the child is in that parent's care.
11. Neither party shall say or do anything which may
estrange the child from the other parent, or injure the opinion
of the child as to the other parent or which may hamper the free
and natural development of the child's 10ve or respect fore the
other parent,
12, Neither party shall consume any illegal drugs of any
kind at any time, Consumption of such is a violation of this
Order. Neither party shall consume alcohol to excess while the
child is in their custody.
13. This order shall remain in effect until further Order
of Court.
Samuel w. Milkes, Esquire
Dan Pollock, Esquire
By the Court,
jf C~ P It,/,
Harold E. Sheely, P.J.
:sld
~~
III ~/%,
..J!.,'f.
TERRI L. PRICE
:
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
,
,
,
,
'"
:
GARY A. RAYHART
: NO, 2016 CIVIL 1994
,
.
GARY A. RAYHART
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
:
:
V.
TERRI L. PRICE
: NO, 2158 CIVIL 1994
:
: CIVIL ACTION - CUSTODY
IN RE: CUSTODY
BEFORE: SHEELY. P,J.
OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
In this custody matter, the mother seeks modification of an
Order of Court granting primary physical custody of the parties'
daughter, Stephanie Bea Rayhart, to the father. The procedural
history of this case, quite detailed, follows,
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The mother, initially the primary caretaker, filed for
primary physical custody of the child on April 19, 1994. A
conciliation conference was then scheduled for June 3, The
father also filed for primary physical custody on April 26 and
conciliation was set for May 19, Apparently, the fact that two
dates were set for conciliation regarding the same matter was
discovered, and June 3 became the official conference date.
Meanwhile, the Court entered a temporary custody order on
May 5, 1994, granting the parties custody of the child on an
alternating two week schedule pending the results of the
conference, On May 20, 1994, the father filed a Petition for
NO. 2016 CIVIL 1994
2158 CIVIL 1994
Special Relief, captioned at a new number, requesting the Court
to suspend the temporary custody order until the June 3
conference. The father alleged that Stacy Rayhart, the child's
twin sister, died while the mother had primary custody of both of
the children. The Court granted the father's request. The
Honorable Kevin A, Hess entered an order temporarily suspending
the temporary custody order entered by the Court on May 5, 1994,
and further directed the parties to appear before the Honorable
Harold E. Sheely on May 23, 1994, to argue their respective
positions,
When this matter was brought before the Court on May 23,
1994, the Court vacated the temporary custody order entered on
May 5, 1994, The Court gave temporary custody of the child to
the father until June 3, 1994, in light of the fact that the
investigation into the death of the child's twin sister involved
the mother's boyfriend, who had lived with her and the children
at the time of the death,'
Eventually, after further conciliation attempts failed and
prior to a scheduled hearing, the parties signed a consent
agreement on December 14, 1994. ,Among other things, the
agreement gave primary physical custody of the child to the
father and partial physical custody to the mother for a six month
period, During this time the mother was to receive counseling
IApparently, the boyfriend had given the child an adult dose
of Tylenol. He was not prosecuted,
2
NO, 2016 CIVIL 1994
2158 CIVIL 1994
for alcohol abuse and complete a parenting program. The
agreement further provided that if after six months the parties
could not agree on a specific custody schedule, either party had
the option to petition the Court,
This matter was again before a conciliator on January 11,
1996, upon the mother's petition for primary custody, Custody
was not resolved and the case was scheduled for a hearing on
April 1, 1996, In the meantime, the Court entered a temporary
orde~, still giving the father primary custody in accordance with
the December 14, 1994 order but setting the mother's physical
custody schedule for alternating weekends from Friday 6:00 p.m,
until Sunday at 6:00 p.m" and every Wednesday from 8:30 a,m,
until 4:15 p.m,
On April 1, the scheduled hearing took place regarding
custody and the issue of the father's contempt of the Court's
temporary order, At the end of the day, testimony was not yet
completed, and the hearing was continued to May 10, 1996. The
Court did, however, adjudicate the father in contempt for failing
to comply with the Court's temporary order on two successive
Wednesdays and issued a stern warning to him to follow the order.
Hearing testimony was completed on May 10, 1996. The Court
then issued a new partial custody schedule for June, July, and
August, giving each parent one week with the child. In addition,
the parties were given custody on Wednesday of each week the
parent did not have the child, The parties were to follow this
3
NO. 2016 CIVIL 1994 2158 CIVIL 1994
schedule until August 19, 1996, at which time the Court scheduled
another hearing to evaluate the progress of these periods of
custody. Furthermore, the Court took into account that the
mother planned to marry her fiance in the summer. The Court
entered no further order of contempt against the father at this
time.
The Court held the scheduled hearing on August 19, 1996, to
review the outcome of the summer schedule, This hearing was
continued until September 30, 1996, to complete testimony,
Because the child needed to be registered for school and the
father did not yet have housing in the child's school district,
the Court granted the mother temporary primary physical custody
on August 23, 1996.
PETITION FOR CONTEMPT
Host recently, the father filed a Petition for Contempt,
averring that the mother moved from her current residence, and he
has not had been able to exercise custody, He further alleged
that the child had to change schools. The mother filed an
answer, providing an updated address and affirming that the child
does attend a different school, The mother further claimed that
the Court's most current order did not provide for a custody
schedule and therefore she can not be held in contempt, She
maintains that the father is agreeable to the child attending her
current school because she can ride a bus, rather than having to
walk. The Court believes that the mother has not violated any
4
--..-
I.:, ..:~':",
", '.~
. ,.,......,.-
NO. 2016 CIVIL 1994
2158 CIVIL 1994
order and that issuing a final custody order will resolve the
issues presented in the father's petition.
FINDINGS OF FACT
The Court makes the following findings of fact from the
hearings held on August 19, 1996, and September 30, 1996,
regarding the summer schedule, in order to make a final custody
determination.
1. The mother lives with her mother and her fiance, Thomas
French.2 The two postponed their wedding plans until January of
1997.
2, The mother still works the same shift, 11 p.m.-7 a,m.,
but has been promoted to the position of weaver, Thomas works 8
a.m. to 5 p,m,
3. The mother presented testimony that the father on
several occasions varied from the custody schedule set forth in
the orders of December 14, 1994 and April 1, 1996, which were in
place until June 23, 1996, The mother further stated that the
father also violated the June 23 order when it took effect.
Specifically,
a. June 12 (Wed.): He brought the child back one and a
half hours early,
b. June 14 (Fri.): He wanted the child on her weekend
to take the child to Virginia, She agreed if she could
have her the fOllowing Monday through Wednesday, He
refused to let her have the child at this time because
the mother was sleeping, When she works the night
2 This individual is not the same person who was implicated
in the death of Stacy Rayhart,
5
NO. 2016 CIVIL 1994
2158 CIVIL 1994
shift, her mother supervises the child, Be agreed to
bringing her Wednesday at 9:00 but brought her three
hours earlier,
c. June 22 (Sat,): Be brought the child one day
early; the new order was supposed to begin June 23. At
this time, the father notified the mother's brother
that he would pick her up Thursday instead of
Wednesday, Counsel for the mother notified counsel for
the father of this situation. See Plaintiff's Bxhibit
'2,
d. June 27 (Wed.): She agreed to let the father have the
child at 1:30 so that he could take her swimming. He
was supposed to bring her back by 8:00 pursuant to the
schedule, but he did not bring her back until 9:30, Be
stated that he lost track of time.
e. July 10 (Wed,): The father did not show up until
8:10 p,m. for his scheduled Wednesday visit, stating
that he did not know it was his day. Because of the
problems with the Wednesday visits, counsel for the
mother wrote to counsel for the father stating that the
mother would not vary from the Court's schedule without
one week's notice. See Plaintiff's Exhibit '1,
f. July 17 (Wed,): The mother did not get her Wednesday
visit, The father brought the child Thursday instead.
The mother never agreed to the change,
g. July 20 (Sat.): The father left the child with his
other daughter who was visiting from Virginia, The
mother agreed, although the visit should have started
on Sunday. Both children got head lice, Bach party
blames the other's household for the problem.
h. July 29 (Mon.): The town police contacted the mother,
requesting her to call the state police because the
father had been jailed for kidnapping charges. See
Plaintiff's Bxhibit '3. The mother picked the child up
at the babysitter the father employs, Further
testimony revealed that these charges had been brought
by the mother of Mr. Rayhart's three other children,
The Court was not provided with official confirmation
that the charges had been dropped; however, the
father's testimony and exhibit reveal that the
Commonwealth of Virginia made a motion to quash the
warrant issued for Mr, Rayhart, See Defendant's
Exhibit 111.
6
NO. 2016 CIVIL 1994
2158 CIVIL 1994
4, The mother testified that the child gets along well with
her fiance and that she does not exhibit behavioral problems.
5, The child has her own room at the mother's home,
6. The father started employment at Montgomery Ward's in
Carlisle as a mechanic. He presently works part-time,
approximately 29-32 hours a week, although he has been promised
full time.
7. He lives with his sister in Newville and has been moved
to the top of the waiting list to receive rental assistance
through the Housing Authority of Cumberland County, The Court
notes that the letter indicates he must receive shared custody of
the child in order to qualify, See Defendant's Exhibit '2. The
father wishes to live in Carlisle,
8, The father employs a babysitter by the name of Ruth
Miller, who lives in Carlisle. Ms. Miller has cared for the
child periodically for over a year. The Court finds no evidence
that Ms, Miller is unfit to care for the child,
9. The father presented no specific testimony as to which
dates he has been denied custody,
10. Both the father and his sister made the following
allegations in support of the father's argument that he should
retain primary physical custody of the child:
a, the child has been wetting the bed~
b, she appeared more insecure in that she follows the
father around constantly during his periods of custody~
7
NO. 2016 CIVIL 1994
2158 CIVIL 1994
c, she had engaged in some sexual discovery with some other
children;
d, she is generally more emotional 1
e, Mr. French has an alcohol problem 1
f, the father saw the child, unattended, swinging on a
gate, and she lives near a highway;
g. the father came to the mother's residence and found
the mother's brother asleep while Stephanie and another
child were left alone;
h. the mother drives without a license,
i, the mother and members of her household smoke
cigarettes which tends to aggravate the child's upper
respiratory system,
DISCUSSION
This Court initially notes the controlling standard in
custody matters, that the best interests of the child is the
paramount concern of the court; "all other considerations are
deemed subordinate to the child's physical, intellectual, moral,
and spiritual well-being," In re Davis, 502 Pa. 110, 119, 465
A,2d 614 (1983), In the present case, the Court finds that
primary physical custody of the child should be restored to the
mother. The Court believes that she is able to provide the most
stable environment for Stephanie for the reasons that follow.
First, the mother had been the primary caretaker until the
incident involving Stacy Rayhart, At that time, the Court had
serious concerns regarding Stephanie's safety and placed the
child with the father until further facts were known, The police
brought no charges against the mother after investigating the
8
NO, 2016 CIVIL 1994 2158 CIVIL 1994
incident. Furthermore, a drug and alcohol counselor evaluated
the mother for drug and alcohol abuse and found no significant
pattern of use to warrant treatment. She also completed a
parenting program, She has terminated her relationship with her
previous boyfriend and is now engaged, The Court has gradually
increased her periods of custody and feels that the safety of the
child is no longer at issue.
Turning to the father's averments, the Court believes that
the father has adopted an overprotective attitude, and we
understand his reasons, given the death of his other child. With
respect to the lice issue, the Court does not find this a
dangerous situation and will not accuse either party of being the
source of the problem. Some of the father's other cqncerns
indicate that he maintains surveillance of the mother's residence
and makes assumptions, Regarding the alleged behavioral changes
Stephanie has been eXhibiting, the Court believes that resolving
the custody situation may improve her emotional condition, If
she experiences further difficulties or continues to act out /
sexually, the parties should seek counseling, Finally,
concerning the smoking issue, the Court would hope that the
parties exercise proper care relative to the child's asthmatic
condition,
Our most difficult task will be to set a custody schedule,
which a review of the procedural history indicates to be the most
serious issue. The crux of the problem appears to be that the
9
NO. 2016 CIVIL 1994
2158 CIVIL l.994
father does not have a fixed work schedule. We firmly believe
that the parties can work this out but in view of their past
history, the Court will establish a custody schedule in our final
order, set forth below,
Finally, with respect to each party's concern of the other's
work schedule during periods of custody, our Superior Court has
stated that "the fact that a parent must work may not deprive
that parent of custody if suitable arrangements are made for the
child's care in his or her absence," X.L.H, v. G,D,H., 318 Pa.
Super. 330, 339, 464 A.2d 1368, 1374 (1983),
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this /;;-cA day of NOVEMBER, 1996, the following
Custody Order is entered regarding the parties' child Stephanie
Bea Rayhart, modifying all previous orders as follows:
1. The parties shall share legal custody,
2. The mother, Terry L. Price, shall have primary physical
custody,
3. The father, Gary A. Rayhart, shall have partial custody
of the child every other weekend, beginning Friday at 6:00 p.m.
until Sunday 6:00 p,m., effective November 8, 1996. The father
shall also have partial custody during the week (Monday-Friday)
on the day that he has off from work, On the day that he has off
from work, he shall pick up the chil.d from school and return her
to the mother's residence at 8:00 p.m, If school is not in
session on that day, he shall pick the child up at 12:00 p,m. at
10
..., ,
NO, 2016 CIVIL 1994
..~...- -.-."---.. ~.,~.~-
2158 CIVIL 1994
the mother's residence and return the child to the mother's
residence at 8:00 p,m.
4. The father shall provide the mother with his work
schedule in writing every Wednesday.
5. The parties shall alternate holidays as follows:
a. The father shall have custody of the child on
Thanksgiving, 1996, from 9:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m,;
b. The mother shall have the child on Christmas Bve, 1996,
from 6:00 p,m, until 1:00 p.m, on Christmas Day; the
father shall have the child from 1:00 p.m. until 7:00
p.m.
c. The father shall have the child on Baster, 1997, from
9:00 a.m. until 7:00 p,m,;
d, The mother shall have the child on the Fourth of July,
1997, from 9:00 a,m, until 7:00 p,m,;
e, The father shall have the child on Labor Day, 1997, from
9:00 a.m, until 7:00 p,m.
If the parent already has custody of the child during a holiday,
the time limits are not applicable, except for Christmas. The
parties shall follow the Christmas schedule as noted above,
alternating each year so that next year, the father will have the
child on Christmas Bve from 6:00 p.m, until 1:00 p.m. on
Christmas Day.
6. The father shall have custody of the child for three
weeks during the summer months of June through August. Two of
these weeks may be consecutive, The father shall give the mother
at least six week's notice prior to exercising his custody for
these weeks,
7. If either the father or the mother wish to vary from
11
NO, 2016 CIVIL 1994
2158 CIVIL 1994
this schedule in any manner, that party must make a request to
the other party in writing at least five days in advance.
8. The parties shall keep each other informed of their
addresses and telephone numbers.
9. Neither party shall move out of a 50 mile radius of
Carlisle without written agreement of the parties or Order of
Court,
10. The mother and father shall notify the other of all
medical care the child receives while in that parent's care.
Each parent shall notify the other immediately of medical
emergencies which arise while the child is in that parent's care.
11. Neither party shall say or do anything which may
estrange the child from the other parent, or injure the opinion
of the child as to the other parent or which may hamper the free
and natural development of the child's love or respect fore the
other parent,
12. Neither party shall consume any illegal drugs of any
kind at any time, Consumption of such is a violation of this
Order. Neither party shall consume alcohol to excess while the
child is in their custody,
13. This order shall remain in effect until further Order
of Court.
Samuel W, Hilkes, Esq.
Dan Pollock, Esq.
:sld
By the Court,
/s/ Harold E, Sheely
Harold E. Sheely, P,J.
12