Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-4397LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., Plaintiff VS. DEANA MURLATT, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO.tS'~' ~/~"/Civi12002 CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY _COMPLAINT FOR SHARED LEGAL AND .PARTIAL PHYSICAL CUSTODY AND NOW, this ~ day of September 2002, comes the Plaintiff, Kenneth Lee, by his Attorney, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, and respectfully requests the following: Your Plaintiff is Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., an adult individual, age 30 years, who currently resides at 709 North Second Street, Apt. 2, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania 17102. The Defendant is Deana Murlatt, an adult individual, age 25 years, who currently resides at 425 7th Street, New Cumberland, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17070. The Plaintiff and Defendant were never married; however of a relationship between the parties, one child was born, namely; Lamont L. Mahoney, III; date of birth, September 17, 2001. The Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., believes it is in the best interest of his child that he be granted shared legal and partial physical custody of his minor child. The minor child has resided at the following addresses over the last five years: 425 7th Street, New Cumberland, PA since birth, September 17, 2001, until present The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County has jurisdiction as the Defendant and the minor child reside in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania and a previous Order was entered on May 16, 2002, granting full physical custody to the mother. Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., does not have a copy of this Order. The Plaintiff has no information of the custody proceedings concerning the child pending in a Court of this Commonwealth or any other state. A PFA was entered in Cumberland County on July 17, 2002, but did not address custody. o The Plaintiff does not know of a person not a party to the proceedings who has physical custody of the child or claims to have custody or visitation rights with respect to the child. 2 WHEREFORE, your Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., by his Attorney, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, respectfully prays your Honorable Court to grant him shared legal and partial physical custody of his child. Respectfully submitted, 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 I.D. No. 07056 Date: September 11, 2002 VERIFICATION I yerify that the statements made in this Complaint for Shared Legal and Partial physical Custody are true and correct. 1 understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR. PLAINTIFF DEANA MURLATT DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 02-4397 CIVIL ACTION LAW IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, Monday, September 16, 2002 , upon consideration of the attached Complaint, it is hereby directed that parties and their respective counsel appear before Melissa P. Greevy, Esq. , the conciliator, at 301 Market Street, Lemoyne, PA 17043 on Monday, October 21, 2002 at 12:30 PM for a Pre-Hearing Custody Conference. At such conference, an effort will be made to resolve the issues in dispute; or if this cannot be accomplished, to define and narrow the issues to be heard by the court, and to enter into a temporary order. All children age five or older may also be present at the conference. Failure to appear at the conference may provide grounds for entry of a temporary or permanent order. The court hereby directs the parties to furnish any and all existing Protection from Abuse orders, Sl~eeial Relief orders, and Custody orders to the conciliator 48 hours i~rior to scheduled bearing. FOR THE COURT, By: /s/ Melissa P. Greevy, Esq, Custody Conciliator The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County is required by law to comply with the Americans with Disabilites Act of 1990. For information about accessible facilities and reasonable accommodations available to disabled individuals having business before the court, please contact our office. All arrangements must be made at least 72 hours prior to any hearing or business before the court. You must attend the scheduled conference or hearing. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR ATTORNEY AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE AN ATTORNEY OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Liberty Avenue Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Telephone (717) 249-3166 LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., Plaintiff VS. DEANA MURLATT, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 02-4397 CIVIL ACTION LAW IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this, ~__ilLiYatic} R--~Dort, it is or-~ered and directed a~foilows: upon consideration of the attac~ea tmstocty con-. ....... n _ 1. Each party shall participate in a minimum of 2 counseling sessions with Deborah L. Salem, CAC, LPC or other professional selected by agreement of the parties and counsel. The purpose of the counseling sessions shall be to assess and provide recommendations regarding the need for anger management counseling/parenting classes for the Father as requested by the Mother as well as the need costs of · · . ' ' s party for superws~on of the Father s period of custody. Each shall be responsible to pay the his or her individual sessmns. 2. The Father, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., and the Mother, Deana Murlatt, shall have shared physical custody of Lamont L. Mahoney, III, bom September 17, 2001. Each parent shall have an equal right, to be exercised jointly with the other parent, to make all major non-emergency decisions affecting the Child's general well-being including, but not limited to, all decisions regarding his health, education and religion· Pursuant to the terms of this paragraph each parent shall be entitled to all records and information pertaining to the Child including, but not limited to, school and medical records and information. 3. The Mother shall have primary physical custody of the Child. 4. The Father shall have periods of visitation with the Child at the Harrisburg YWCA 2 times per week as arranged by agreement between the parties. The Mother shall cooperate in making the Child available for the scheduled sessions. 5. The parties and counsel shall attend an additional Custody Conciliation Conference in the office of the Conciliator, Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire on Tuesday, December 17, 2002, at 8:30 a.m. h~, :Z i,i~t 9~ L3O ZO 6. This Order is entered pursuant to an agreement of the parties at a Custody Conciliation Conference. The parties may modify the provisions of this Order by mutual consent. In the absence of mutual consent, the terms of this Order shall control. BY THE COURT, cc: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire - Counsel for Father Steven Howell, Esquire - Counsel for Mother LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., Plaintiff VS. DEANA MURLATT, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 02-4397 CIVIL ACTION LAW IN CUSTODY PRIOR JUDGE: J. Wesley Oler, Jr. CUSTODY CONCILIATION SUMMARY REPORT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CUMBERLAND COUNTY RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1915.3-8, the undersigned Custody Conciliator submits the following report: 1. The pertinent information concerning the Child who is the subject of this litigation is as follows: NAME Lamont L. Mahoney, III DATE OF BIRTH September 17, 2001 CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF_ Mother 2. A Conciliation Conference was held on October 21, 2002, with the following individuals in attendance: The Father, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., with his counsel, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, and the Mother, Deana Murlatt, with her counsel, Steven Howell, Esquire. 3. The parties agreed to entry of an Order in the form as attached. Date Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire Custody Conciliator LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 2002-4397 DEANA MURLATT, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY PETITION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEl, AND NOW, this 17th day of December 2002, comes Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, and respectfully requests the following: Your Petitioner is Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, the attorney of record for the above-named Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., whose office is located at 1017 North Front Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17102. The Respondent, Deana Murlatt, is represented by Attorney Steven Howell, whose office is located at 619 Bridge Street, New Cumberland, Pennsylvania 17070. o Your Petitioner filed a Complaint for Shared Legal and Partial Physical Custody on behalf of the Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr. As a result of said filing, a Conciliation Conference was held before Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire, at which time all parties with their counsel appeared. o The Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., did not understand why he did not have immediate visitation and custody rights with his child after the Conciliation Conference. o Your Petitioner drove the Plaintiff back to Harrisburg from the Conciliation Conference and at that time, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., was negative and accusatory toward your Petitioner with the efforts made on his behalf at the Conciliation Conference. o A second Conciliation Conference was scheduled for December 17, 2002, which was scheduled to review an evaluation and counseling which the Plaintiff was to undergo prior to December 17, 2002. It was anticipated by the Conciliator and counsel that the evaluation and counseling would be completed by that time. o Your Petitioner believes that the second Conciliation scheduled for December 17, 2002, was rescheduled. Numerous communications were received fi'om Attorney Howell and numerous communications were sent to Attorney Howell by your Petitioner, the Conciliator, as well as the agreed upon counselor, Deborah L. Salem, of Inter Works. 2 10. Copies of all correspondence were forwarded to the Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr. 11. Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr. accused your Petitioner of not keeping him abreast of all information being passed between counsel and the counselor. 12. Mr. Mahoney contacted your Petitioner and accused him of not returning his telephone calls. 13. Mr. Mahoney contacted your Petitioner and accused him of not putting forth his best efforts to represent him in this custody matter. 14. Mr. Mahoney contacted your Petitioner and informed him that he was not satisfied with the representation. During this telephone conversation, your Petitioner instructed the Plaintiff that he would refund all sums received for representation at the Conciliation Conference, said sum being $450.00. 15. This conversation between the Plaintiff and your Petitioner occurred on December 2, 2002, and within ten minutes upon the conclusion of said conversation, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., appeared at the office of your Petitioner and received a refund from your Petitioner in the amount of $450.00. 3 16. Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., accepted this refund and was informed that your Petitioner would cooperate with Mr. Mahoney's new counsel by forwarding any documents needed by Mr. Mahoney's new counsel. 17. Your Petitioner is unable to continue representation of the Plaintiff in this matter as the Plaintiff is not satisfied with your Petitioner's representation, and has confirmed his dissatisfaction by accepting a refund of funds and acknowledgement that he would be seeking ne'w counsel. 18. As of the date of the filing of this Petition, your Petitioner has not been informed that the Plaintiff has obtained new counsel and therefore, it is necessary to request your Honorable Court to permit him to withdraw. 19. Your Petitioner has not been informed of the rescheduled Conciliation date. 20. The Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., will not be harmed or prejudiced by permitting your Petitioner to withdraw as counsel as the next date for the Conciliation has not been set as of this time. 4 WHEREFORE, your Petitioner, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, respectfully prays your Honorable Court to permit him to withdraw as counsel on behalf of the Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr. Respectfully submitted, 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 I.D. No. 07056 5 VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in this Petition to Withdraw as Counsel 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. Arthur K. Dils, Esquire Date: 6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Petition to Withdraw as Counsel has been served upon the following individual by first class, United States mail, postage prepaid, by depositing same at the post office in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on the/~day of December 2002, addressed as follows: Steven Howell, Esquire 619 Bridge Street New Cumberland, PA 17070 Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire 39 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, pA 17055 Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr. 709 N. Second St., Apt. 2 Harrisburg, PA 17102 Date: Respectfully submitted, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 I.D. No. 07056 7 LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., Plaintiff 1N THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 2002-4397 DEANA MURLATT, Defendant CIVIL ACTION -LAW CUSTODY PETITION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL AND NOW, this 17th day of December 2002, comes Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, and respectfully requests the following: Your Petitioner is Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, the attorney of record for the above-named Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., whose office is located at 1017 North Front Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17102. The Respondent, Deana Murlatt, is represented by Attorney Steven Howell, whose office is located at 619 Bridge Street, New Cumberland, Pennsylvania 17070. 3. Your Petitioner filed a Complaint for Shared Legal and Partial Physical Custody on behalf of the Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr. 4. As a result of said filing, a Conciliation Conference was held before Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire, at which time all parties with their counsel appeared. o The Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., did not understand why he did not have immediate visitation and custody rights with his child after the Conciliation Conference. Ge Your Petitioner drove the Plaintiff back to Harrisburg from the Conciliation Conference and at that time, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., was negative and accusatory toward your Petitioner with the efforts made on his behalf at the Conciliation Conference. A second Conciliation Conference was scheduled for December 17, 2002, which was scheduled to review an evaluation and counseling which the Plaintiff was to undergo prior to December 17, 2002. It was anticipated by the Conciliator and counsel that the evaluation and counseling would be completed by that time. 8. Your Petitioner believes that the second Conciliation scheduled for December 17, 2002, was rescheduled. o Numerous communications were received from Attorney Howell and numerous communications were sent to Attorney Howell by your Petitioner, the Conciliator, as well as the agreed upon counselor, Deborah L. Salem, of Inter Works. 2 10. Copies of all correspondence were forwarded to the Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr. 11. Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr. accused your Petitioner of not keeping him abreast of all information being passed between counsel and the counselor. 12. Mr. Mahoney contacted your Petitioner and accused him of not returning his telephone calls. 13. Mr. Mahoney contacted your Petitioner and accused him of not putting forth his best efforts to represent him in this custody matter. 14. Mr. Mahoney contacted your Petitioner and informed him that he was not satisfied with the representation. During this telephone conversation, your Petitioner instructed the Plaintiff that he would refund all sums received for representation at the Conciliation Conference, said sum being $450.00. 15. This conversation between the Plaintiff and your Petitioner occurred on December 2, 2002, and within ten minutes upon the conclusion of said conversation, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., appeared at the office of your Petitioner and received a refund from your Petitioner in the amount of $450.00. 3 16. Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., accepted this refund and was informed that your Petitioner would cooperate with Mr. Mahoney's new counsel by forwarding any documents needed by Mr. Mahoney's new counsel. 17. Your Petitioner is unable to continue representation of the Plaintiff in this matter as the Plaintiff is not satisfied with your Petitioner's representation, and has confirmed his dissatisfaction by accepting a refund of funds and acknowledgement that he would be seeking new counsel. 18. As of the date of the filing of this Petition, your Petitioner has not been informed that the Plaintiff has obtained new counsel and therefore, it is necessary to request your Honorable Court to permit him to withdraw. 19. Your Petitioner has not been informed of the rescheduled Conciliation date. 20. The Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., will not be harmed or prejudiced by permitting your Petitioner to withdraw as counsel as the next date for the Conciliation has not been set as of this time. 4 your Honorable Court to permit him to withdraw as counsel Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr. WHEREFORE, your Petitioner, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, respectfully prays on behalf of the Respectfully submitted, Arthur K. Dil's, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 I.D. No. 07056 5 VERIFICATION I verify that the statements made in this Petition to Withdraw as Counsel 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. Arthur K. Dils, Esquire Date: [ t>Q J l ~) [O ~>3,- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the within Petition to Withdraw as Counsel has been served upon the following individual by first class, United States mail, postage prepaid, by depositing same at the post office in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on the ./~day of December 2002, addressed as follows: Steven Howell, Esquire 619 Bridge Street New Cumberland, PA 17070 Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire 39 West Main Street Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Date: j~:~//"~//~ 2... Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr. 709 N. Second St., Apt. 2 Harrisburg, PA 17102 Respectfully submitted, 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 I.D. No. 07056 7 LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., Plaintiff VS. DEANA MURLATT, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2002-4397 CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY RULE TO SHOW CAUSE AND NOW, this ?o ltL, day of ~,)~c_e-w~oe_y 2002, upon presentation and consideration of the within Petition to Withdraw as Counsel, it is hereby ORDERED that a Rule is issued upon the Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., and the Defendant, Deana Murlatt, to show cause why, if any, said Petition should not be granted. RULE returnable [ o days after service. Service upon counsel for the Defendant shall be sufficient service upon Defendant. BY THE COURT: Distribution: J0 d'Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., 709 North Second St., Apt. 2, Harrisburg, PA 17102 d' Steven Howell, Esquire, 619 Bridge Street, New Cumberland, PA 17070 v/Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire, 39 West Market Street, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 v' LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR, Plaintiff VS. DEANA MURLATT, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERL32qD COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 02-4397 CIVIL ACTION LAW IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this gO ~ day of ,L~¢ ae .-, Lcd_) , 2002, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows: 1. In the event the parties are not able to reach an agreement as to ongoing custody arrangements for the Child following counseling, a hearing is scheduled for the ,fid ~L day of ~ ,2003, at /:30 o'clock tI.~.m, in Court Room No / , of the Cumberland County Courthouse. The hearing date will be reserved until 30 days before the scheduled date, by which time counsel for the parties shall contact the court to either cancel or confirm the Hearing date. If the Hearing date is not confirmed by the parties or counsel on or before the 30th day before the scheduled Heating date, the Hearing will be automatically cancelled. In the event a Hearing is necessary, the Father shall be deemed to be the moving party and shall proceed initially with testimony. Counsel for the parties shall file with the Court and opposing counsel a memorandum setting forth each party's position on custody, a list of witnesses who are expected to testify at the Hearing, and a summary of the anticipated testimony of each witness. These memoranda shall be filed at least 10 days prior to the Heating date. 2. Within 30 days of completion of counseling, counsel for either party may contact the Conciliator to schedule an additional Custody Conciliation Conference, if deemed necessary to resolve the custody issues without a Hearing. cc:,~zteve Howell, Esquire - Counsel for Mother ,/Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire - Counsel for Father BY T~E COURT, ~(/esley Oler Jr. Jo LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR : Plaintiff : : vs. : 02-4397 : DEANA MURi,ATT, : Defendant : IN CUSTODY PRIOR JUDGE: J.Wesley Oler, Jr. IN THE CO'URT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANI CIVIL ACTION LAW CUSTODY CONCILIATION SUMMARY REPORT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CUMBERLAND COUNTY RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1915.3-8, the undersigned Custody Conciliator submits the following report: 1. The pertinent information concerning the Child who is the subject of this litigation is as follows: NAME Lamont L. Mahoney III DATE OF BIRTH September 17, 2001 CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF Mother 2. A Conciliation Conference was scheduled in the prior Order of Court for December 17, 2002 to follow the parties' counseling with Deborah Salem. However, the parties were not able to obtain appointments with Deborah Salem until after the scheduled Conciliation date. It was agreed that counsel would contact the Conciliator to reschedule the Conference after the parties have completed counseling. A telephone Conference was held between counsel and the Conciliator at the time of the originally scheduled Conference on December 17th, at which time the Father requested that a Hearing date be reserved to insure that the matter is resolved promptly in the event counseling is not successful. 3. It was agreed during the telephone conference that the Father's periods of supervised visitation at the YWCA would continue as fi:equently as possible with dates already scheduled through early January, although counsel did not believe it was necessary 'to specify the visitation schedule in the proposed Order. Accordingly, the Conciliator submits an Order in the form as attached reserving a Hearing date in the event the parties are not able to reach an agreement as to all outstanding custody issues following counseling and also providing for an additional Custody Conciliation Conference at the request of counsel for either party following counseling in an effort to resolve this matter without the need for the Hearing. Date Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire ~ Custody Conciliator LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., Plaintiff Vs. DEANA MURLATT, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLANTD COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2002-4397 CIVIL ACTION - LAW MOTION TO MAKE RULE ABSOLUTE comes Arthur K. Dils, AND NOW, this 4th day of February, 2003, Esquire and respectfully requests the following: Your Movant is Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, whose office is located at 1017 N. Front Street, Harrisburg, Pa. 17102. On or about December 20, 2002, your Movant filed a Petition to Withdraw as Counsel on behalf of the above named Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr. On December 20, 2002, your Honorable Court, The Honorable J. Wesley Oler, Jr. entered a Rule to Show Cause why said Petition should not be granted, said rule was returnable ten (10) days after service. See Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Said Petition and Rule to Show Cause was served upon the Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr. by Certified Mail No. 7002 1000 0005 1876 9684 on January 9, 2003. See Exhibit "B" attached hereto being the remm receipt card executed by the Plaintiff acknowledging receipt of the same. o Said Petition and Rule to Show Cause was served upon the Defendant's counsel, Steven Howell, Esquire by Certified Mail No. 7002 1000 0005 1876 9677 on January 8, 2003. See Exhibit "C" attached hereto being the remm receipt card executed by Steven Howell acknowledging receipt of the same. As of the date of the filing of this Motion, neither the Plaimiff nor the Counsel for the Defendant has filed an objection to the Petition to Withdraw as Counsel. WHEREFORE, your Movant, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, respectfully prays your Honorable Court to enter an Order making the role absolute, and permitting him to withdraw as counsel on behalf of the Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., in the above captioned action. Respect~ally submitted, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 232-9724 I.D. No. 07056 D£G 2 0 LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., Plaintiff VS. DEANA MURLATT, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2002-4397 CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY RULE TO SHOW CAUSE AND NOW, this ~ day of~~.12~~ 2002, upon presentation and consideration of the within Petition to Withdraw as Counsel, it is hereby ORDERED that a Rule is issued upon the Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., and the Defendant, Deana Murlatt, to show cause why, if any, said Petition should not be granted. RULE returnable ] ~) days after service. Service upon counsel for the Defendant shall be sufficient service upon Defendant. BY THE COURT: Distribution: Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., 709 North Second St., Apt. 2, Harrisburg, PA 17102 Steven Howell, Esquire, 619 Bridge Street, New Cumberland, PA 17070 Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire, 39 We~~i~tg~e,g Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 · Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. · print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. · Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. ~cle Addressed to: 7° 2. Article Number (rr"'s~r~oms.~ice~abeO ~/'6 0 j~ /6d o PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt ~-~ A~nt . [] Addre~?_: B. Received by (Ptfnted Name) I C. I~atp of Delive~j I D. I~ ~Jv~'~ a~lr~s a~ ~ ~ 1 ~ '~ Y~ ff YES, ~t~ ~iv~ a~s ~w: ~ No 3. ~rvice Type /,~,~e~ed Mail [] Express Mail - LJ Hegistered [] Return Receipt for Merchandise [] Insured Mail [] C.O.D. 4. Restricted DelK-c;~? (Extra Fee) [] Yes 102595-01.M-25( EXHIBIT "B" · Complete items 1,2, end 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. · Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. · Attach this card to the back of the mailpisoe, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: I-I Addresse~ D. Iscl~iveryaddr~c~iff~r~{fn:~f~l? r-I'y~s' * If YES, ent~ deiive~ add~ ~ow: ~ N0 { ,j~erti'fied Mail [] Mail Express I1 Registered [] Return Receipt for Merchandise [] Insured Mail [] C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) [] Yes 2. Article Number (Transfer from service label) PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-01.M-25( EXHIBIT "C" VE RIFI C A TI 0 N I verify that the statements made in this Motion to Make Rule Absolute are true and correct. I understand th:at false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unswom falsification to authorities. Arthur K. Dils,, Esquire Date: February 4, 2003 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr. 709 N. Second Street Apt. 2 Harrisburg, Pa. 17102 I, Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, hereby certify that a tree and correct copy of the within Motion has been served upon the following individuals by first class, United States mail, postage prepaid, by depositing same at the post office in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on the 4th day of February, 2003, addressed as follows: Steven Howell, Esquire 619 Bridge Street New Cumberland, PA. 17070 Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire 39 W. Market Street Mechanicsburg, Pa. 17055 Respectfully submitted, ) Arthur K. Dils, Esquire 1017 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17102 (717) 2312-9724 I.D. No. 07056 Date: February 4, 2003 LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Vs. NO. 2002-4397 DEANA MURLATT, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this !~ ['~ day of February, 2003, upon presentation and consideration of the within Motion to Make Rule Absolute, it is hereby Ordered that said Motion is granted and Arthur K. Dils, Esquire is hereby withdrawn as counsel for the Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., in the above captioned custody matter. BY THE COURT: T~~:c, zaL!cL~.~esley O~e~, J~., Judge Distribution: v/Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., 709 N. Second St., Apt. 2, Hbg., Pa. 17102 /~teven Howell, Esquire, 619 Bridge St., New Cumberland, Pa. 17070 //Arthur K. Dils, Esquire, 1017 N. Front St., Hbg., Pa. 17102 ~q)awn S. Sunday, Esquire, 39 W. Market Street, Mechanicsburg, Pa. 17055 DEANA L. MURLATT, Plaintiff LAMONT L. MAHONEY, II, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 02-1368 CIVIL TERM LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., Plaintiff DEANA MURLATT, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 02-4397 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 12th day of March, 2003, it appearing that the above captioned cases involve the same parties and the same minor child, the cases are consolidated to No. 02-4397 Civil Term. Steven Howell, Esq. 619 Bridge Street New Cumberland, PA 17070 Attorney for Deana L. Murlatt Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esq. 5000 Ritter Road, Suite 202 P.O. Box 779 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Attorney for Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr. BY THE COURT, JTesley O1~')., :re LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., Plaintiff DEANA MURLATT, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 02-4397 CIVIL TERM IN RE: DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO PERMIT EXPERT TESTIMONY VIA TELEPHONE ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 18th day of March, 2003, upon consideration of the above motion, and upon agreement of counsel, it is ordered and directed that Deb Salem is permitted to testify by telephone at the hearing scheduled in this matter for March 20, 2003, without prejudice to Plaintiff's counsel's right to object to the testimony of Deb Salem as an expert in the field of child custody evaluations or recommendations. Steven Howell, Esq. 619 Bridge Street New Cumberland, PA 17070 AttOrney for Deana L. Murlatt Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esq. 5000 Ritter Road, Suite 202 P.O. Box 779 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Attorney for Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr. BY THE COURT, :rc DEANA L. MURLATT, PLAINTIFP LAMONT L. MAHONEY, II, DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2002 - 1368 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., PLAINTIFF DEANA L. MURLATT, DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2002 - 4397 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY MOTION TO PERMIT EXPERT TESTIMONY VIA TELEPHONE 1. With the agreement of counsel and the parties this Honorable Court entered an Order on October 28, 2002 directing the parties to participate in sessions with Deb Salem of Interworks to: "assess and provide recommendations regarding the need for anger management counseling/parenting classes for the Father as requested by the Mother as well as the need for supervision of the Father's periods of custody." See Exhibit "A" at ¶1. 2. Deb Salem has issued a report dated January 31, 2003 and made several recommendations including (See Exhibit "B": 1. With regard to Mr. Mahoney's ability, or lack there-of to modulate his anger, it is my clinical opinion that he would benefit from a therapeutic program designed to help him understand how his past history as well as the present situation inspire, at times, inappropriate responses to his frustrations. See Page 2 at ¶1 of 1/31/03 Report. 2. I would suggest that the parents select a mutually agreed upon relative who can supervise the contacts between Mr. Mahoney and his son during the time that he is completing his therapy. See Page 2 at "Other Considerations" of 1/31/03 Report. 3. In addition, until there is better resolve between the parents, perhaps exchanges of their son can be supervised so that Ms. Murlatt feels safe and secure. See Page 2 at "Other Consideration" of 1/31/03 Report. 3. Deb Salem is not available to testify in person on March 20, 2003. 4. Deb Salem, however, is available to testify via telephone at 717-236-1912 from 2:15 PM to 2:30 PM on March 20, 2003. 5. Attorney Jeanne B. Costopoulos is not opposed to the telephone testimony of Deb Salem and has concurred in permitting telephone testimony. Attorney Costopoulos does not concur that Deb Salem is an expert in the field of child custody evaluations or recommendations. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Deana L. Murlatt respectfully requests this Honorable Court to: (1) permit the telephone testimony of Deb Salem on March 20, 2003 or (2) continue the hearing until Deb Salem can appear in person before this Court. Respectfully submitted, ~3teven_How~ll, E(qu. - ~ 619 Bridge Street J New Cumberland, PA 17070 (717) 770-1277 Supreme Court I.D. 62063 Attorney for Plaintiff Certificate of Service I hereby certify that on the date set forth below a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon all counsel of record via postage prepaid, first class United States Mall addressed as follows: Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire Costopoulos & Welch P.O. Box 779 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Date: March 17, 2003 BY: LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., Plaintiff VS. DEANA MURLATT, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 02-4397 CIVIL ACTION LAW IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this ,~? day of (~~ , 2002, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Report, it is ordered and directed as follows: 1. Each party shall participate in a minimum of 2 counseling sessions with Deborah L. Salem, CAC, LPC or other professional selected by agreement of the parties and counsel. The purpose of the counseling sessions shall be to assess and provide recommendations regarding the need for anger management counseling/parenting classes for the Father as requested by the Mother as well as the need for supervision of the Father's periods of custody. Each party shall be responsible to pay the costs of his or her individual sessions. 2. The Father, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., and the Mother, Deana Murlatt, shall have shared physical custody of Lamont L. Mahoney, III, born September 17, 2001. Each parent shall have an equal right, to be exercised jointly with the other parent, to make all major non-emergency decisions affecting the Child's general well-being including, but not limited to, all decisions regarding his health, education and religion. Pursuant to the terms of this paragraph each parent shall be entitled to all records and information pertaining to the Child including, but not limited to, school and medical records and information. 3. The Mother shall have primary physical custody of the Child. 4. The Father shall have periods of visitation witli the Child at the Harrisburg YWCA 2 times per week as arranged by agreement betwehn the parties. The Mother shall cooperate in making the Child available for the scheduled sessions. 5. The parties and counsel shall attend an additional Custody Conciliation Conference in the office of the Conciliator, Dawn S. Sunday, Esquire on Tuesday, December 17, 2002, at 8:30 a.m. 6. This'Order is entered pursuant to an agreement of the parties at a Custody Conciliation Conference. The parties may modify the provisions of this Order by mutual consent. In the absence of mutual consent, the terms of this Order shall control. BY THE COURT, Jo cc: Arthur K. Dils, Esquire - Counsel for Father Steven Howell, Esquire - Counsel for Mother rP, UE COPY FROM RECC?!) rhi~. 2~ ~.~..~ day ~ ~~ ,?~ ~ot~r~ ' ~ 43'35A Nm-th Frm,.- llarrisbtrr'g PA' t Tel 717-236-6630 Fax 717-236-6677 Clinical Director D~bo~,~ L. ,5~1¢~, CAC, LFC Zho~a~ Toon¢, M,.~ DATE: TO: FROM: 01-31-03 Stephen Howell, Esq Jeanne Costopulos, Esq Deborah L. Salem, MHS, LPC Deana Murlatt V Lamont Mahoney #02-1368 Below, please find the results of my assessment in the above referenced matter. Feel free to contact me with questions. Scope of Assessment: According to information received from Steven Howell, Esq, it was decided by the custody conciliator that I would address the following questions related to the above referenced matter: 1. Would Mr. Mahoney benefit from anger management classes or therapy to prevent additional PFA violations or confrontations with Ms. Murlatt? 2. Would Mr. Mahoney benefit from parenting classes to take care of his one year old child?. 3. Does Mr. Mahoney have the infrastructure (car seat, crib, place for clothes, toys and other baby items) to take care of an infant overnight when he does not lease or own any apartment or other dwelling? In order to answer the specific questions asked, I interviewed LaMont Mahoney for two one- hour sessions. As well, .he completed several questionnaires designed to understand his psycho-social history. Additionally, I se6ured information from the YWCA Visitation Center about Mr. Mahoney's experiences there. Finally, I held a one hour interview Wqth Deanna Murlatt and reviewed court documents and written information from the attorneys for both sides. Imbressions: On the basis of all of the information gathered and reviewed, I offer the followIng answers to the specific questions asked. 1. With regard to Mr. Mahoney's ability, or lack there-of to modulate his anger, it ~s my clinical opinion that he would benefit from a therapeutic program designed to help him understand how his past history as well as the present situation inspire, at times, inappropriate responses to his frustrations. I believe Mr. Mahoney can either attend an anger management program or seek individual therapy W~th a proti~ssional skilled to help lacll~tate the k/nd of psycho-education and insight he needs to help release his frustrations more productively. An anger management program may be more cost etl~ct~ve tbr Mr. Mahone~' but he should be given a choice as to which type of service he prefers. Whichever is chose'n. the therapist in charge of Mr. Mahoney's care must be able to report to the court or the attorneys as to his progress. Additional information w/Il be forwarded by this assessment to the selected therapist. 2. With regard to Mr. Mahoney's ability to parent, it does not appear to be an area where he needs remedial care. According to the records from the Visitation Center (based on 15 contacts between Mr. Mahoney and his son), the recent report of Ms. Murlatt, and Mr. Mahoney's responses to parenting questions, there does not appear to be any serious concern about his abilities as a parent.. In essence, his unmodulated emoUon appears to be l'us major short coming, not lack of parenting skills. With regard to whether Mr. Mahoney has the resources to care for his son overnight, by his report, he does. I did not complete a home study but would be willing to arrange such when Mr. Mahoney begins overnights w/th his son. .Other Consideration,; It is notable that part of Mr. Mahoney's frustrations are the result of restrictions he experiences using the YWCA as the Visitation Center for his limited contacts Uath his son. The YWCA does not have the staffto provide the two (2) sessions per week that are afforded him. I would suggest that the parents select a mutually agreed upon relative who can supervise the contacts between Mr. Mahoney and his son during the time that he is completing his therapy. This will expand the father/son contact time, normalize their contacts more, but still keep the kind of supervision that comforts Ms. Murtatt. In addition, until there is better resolve between the parents, perhaps exchanges of their son can be supervised so that Ms. Murlatt feels sate and secure CC~ Deana Murlatt Lamont Mahoney LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., Plaintiff DEANA MURLATT, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW No. 02-4397 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 20th day of March, 2003, upon consideration of Plaintiff,s Complaint for Shared Legal and Partial Physical Custody, and following a conference in chambers with counsel for the Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., in the person of Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire, and counsel for Defendant, Deana Murlatt, in the person of Steven Howell, Esquire, and it appearing that one of Defendant,s witnesses is unavailable at this time, and that the Honorable Edward E. Guido is able to hold a rescheduled hearing in this matter on April 9, 2003, at 1:00 p.m., this case is transferred to the Honorable Edward E. Guido. By the Court, Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire For the Plaintiff Steven Howell, Esquire For the Defendant The Honorable Edward E. Guido wcy LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR Plaintiff VS. DEANA MURLATT, Defendant PRIOR JUDGE: J.Wesley Oler, Jr. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA O2-4397 CIVIL ACTION LAW IN CUSTODY CUSTODY CONCILIATION SUMMARY REPORT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CUMBERLAND COUNTY RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1915.3-8, the undersigned Custody Conciliator submits the following report: 1. The pertinent information concerning the Child who is the subject of this litigation is as follows: NAME Lamont L. Mahoney III ~DATE OF BIRTH September 17, 2001 CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF Mother 2. A Conciliation Conference was held on March 13, 2003 with the following individuals in attendance: the Father, Lamont L. Mahoney Jr. with his counsel, Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire, and the Mother, Deana Murlatt, with her counsel, Steven Howell, Esquire. 3. A prior conciliation conference was held in this matter on December 17, 2002 after which a proposed Order was submitted reserving a heating date at the request of the Father, in the event that the assessment to be conducted by Deborah Salem did not result in a resolution of all issues. The Order permitted counsel to schedule an additional Conciliation Conference if necessary to resolve the issues without the necessity of a hearing. Subsequently, the recommendations were received fi.om Deborah Salem and a conciliation conference was scheduled at the Mother's request pursuant to the Order. The Conciliator failed to confirm with the Father's counsel that the Father agreed that a conference would be useful in resolving the issues without the necessity of the hearing. 4. It was determined quickly at the conference that the counseling/assessment did not serve to bring the parties closer to a resolution of this matter and further conciliation would not be effective. As the hearing is scheduled for March 20, 2003, no further Order is necessary at this time. Date Custody Conciliator CC: Steve Howell, Esquire - Counsel for Mother Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire - Counsel for Father LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., : Plaintiff : : V. : : DEANA MURLATT, : Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2002-4397 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY IN RE: TEMPORARY ORDER ORDER OF COUR% AND NOW, this 9th day of April, 2003, after hearing, it's hereby ordered and directed as follows: 1. The parties shall have shared legal custody of their child, Lamont L. Mahoney, III, born September 17, 2001. Each parent shall have equal right, to be exercised jointly with the other parent, to make all major non-emergency decisions affecting the child's general well being, including, but not limited to, all decisions regarding his health, education, religion, and welfare. Pursuant to the terms of this paragraph, each parent shall be entitled to all records and information pertaining to the child, including, but not limited to, school and medical records and information. 2. The mother shall have primary physical custody of the child. 3. The father may visit with the child only in the presence of his mother, Donna Marsh, until further Order of Court. The visits shall be every Thursday evening from after work until 8:00 p.m., and every Sunday from noon until 5:00 p.m. On Thursday father shall pick the child up at daycare and return the child to mother's residence. On Sunday he shall pick the child up and return the child to mother's residence. Donna Marsh shall be with him at all times. She shall pick the child up at or deliver the child to mother's door while father waits in the car. Mother's husband, Charles Marsh, shall not be in the presence of the child during these periods of supervised visitation. 4. It is suggested that father attend individual anger management counseling with a therapist approved by Debra Salem. The counselor should contact Ms. Salem to get input on the clinical issues to be addressed. We will consider ending supervised visitation upon receiving a report from the counselor that father has progressed in anger management counseling to the point where such supervised visitation is no longer necessary. 5. We have reviewed the father's exhibit number 1 and consider it to be a reasonable proposal for partial physical custody. We will consider implementing that schedule, or any other schedule agreed upon by the parties, when father is far enough along in anger management therapy to make it appropriate. A further hearing in this matter is scheduled for Friday, June 20, 2003, at 8:30 a.m., at which time we will hear testimony regarding how the supervised visitations have worked, and father's progress in anger management counseling. Provided, however, that if the parties have reached an agreement as to father's periods of partial physical custody, the hearing may be cancelled. By the Court, Edward E. Guido, J. /Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire Costopoulos & Welch P.O. Box 779 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 For the Plaintiff ~teven Howell, Esquire '~ 619 Bridge Street New Cumberland, PA 17070 For the Defendant :mae LAMONT L. MAHONEY JR., Plaintiff VS. DEANA MURLATT, Defendant THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. 2002-4397 ,CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - AT LAW 1N CUSTODY PI,AINTII~F~8 RF,~PON~F, TIr} DI~J~;NnANT,R MOTION TO CONTINIll~..IIINF, 20:200_'11 HF, ARING ~lNlUlT, EX'PERT REPORT glA~ NOT REF,,N PgOVi[}F,l'} IN ACCOR1}ANC, F, Vi/ITH PA.R.C~p. §191 ~-8(i) AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., by and through his attorney, Jeann6 B. Costopoulos, Esquire, and files the following Response to Defendant's Motion to Continue June 20, 2003 Hearing Since Expert Report Has Not Been Provided in Accordance with Pa.R.C.P. §1915.8(i): 1. through 9. No response required. 10. Plaintiff has desired unsupervised visitation with his sort since the parties separated in June of 2002. 11. This Honorable Court heard testimony on April 9, 2003 at which time the attached Order of Court dated April 9, 2003 was entered. 12. The attached Order does not require Plaintiff's counselor to review Plaintiff's alleged "family history of domestic violence" prior to providing counseling to Plaintiff. Instead, it states that the counselor should contact Deb Salem to get input on the clinical issues to be addressed. 13. Deb Salem referred Plaintiffto Ed Lemle, who obtained input from her on the clinical issues to be addressed. 14. Pa.R.C.P. 1915.8(i) applies to a situation in which a person is having an evaluation performed. In the instant case, Deb Salem has already evaluated Plaintiff. Plaintiff's current counselor is merely providing counseling in response to Deb Salem's clinical findings; he is not conducting another evaluation of Plaintiff. Therefore, Rule 1915.80) does not apply and Defendant's Motion for Continuance should be denied. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests this Honorable Court to confirm the June 20, 2003 hearing and to deny Defendant's Motion for Continuance. DATED: Respectfully Submitted By: ~ ' . Costopoulos, Esquire ATTORNEY FOR PLA/NTIFF 5000 Ritter Road, Suite 202 Mechanicsburg, PA 1705:5 Phone: (717) 790-9546 Supreme Ct. ID No. 68735 LAMONT L. MAHONEY JR., Plaintiff VS. DEANA MURLATT, Defendant : THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : : No. 2002-4397 CIVIL : : CIV1L ACTION - AT LAW : 1N CUSTODY A TTORNTF. Y VERIFICATION Undersigned counsel, Jeann~ B. Costopoulos, Esquire, hereby verifies and states that: 1. She is the attorney of record for Lamont L. Mahoney, Jr., Plaintiff. 2. She is authorized to make this verification on his behalf. 3. The facts set forth in the foregoing motion are knovm to her and not necessarily to her client. 4. The facts set forth in the foregoing motion are true and correct to the best of her knowledge, information, and belief. 5. She is aware that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. 4904 relating to unswom falsification to authorities. BY: ~ Jeann~ B. Costopoulos, Esquire ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF 5000 Ritter Road, Suite 20,2 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Phone: (717) 790-9546 Supreme Ct. ID No. 68735 LAMONT L. MAHONEY JR., Plaintiff VS. DEANA MURLATT, Defendant : THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : : No. 2002-4397 CIVIL : : CIVIL ACTION' - AT LAW : IN CUSTODY CERTIFICATE OF ,RERVICE I, Jeann~ B. Costopoulos, Esquire, hereby certify that I mn this day serving a copy of the foregoing document upon the person, and in the manner, indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the PA Rules of Civil Procedure by faxing a copy of same and depositing a copy of the same with the United States Post Office at Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, through first class mail, prepaid, and addressed as follows: Stephen Howell, Esquire VIA FACSIMILE NO. (717) 770-1277 Stephen Howell, Esquire 619 Bridge Street New Cumberland, PA 17070 DATED: BY: e~at~ne B. Costopouios, Esquire ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF 5000 Ritter Road, Suite 20:2 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Phone: (717) 790-9546 Supreme Ct. ID No. 68735 LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., Plaintiff V. DEANA MURLATT, Defendant IN THE COUR3? OF COMMON PLEAS OF CL~4BERL~D COUIqTY, PENNSYLV~/qIA NO. 2002-4397 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY IN RE: TEMPOP~ARY ORDER ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 9th day of April, 2003, after hearing, it's hereby ordered and directed as follows: 1. The parties shall have shared legal custody of their child, Lamont L. Mahoney, III, born September 17, 2001. Each parent shall have equal right, to be exercised jointly with the other parent, to make all major non-emergency decisions affecting the child's general well being, including, but not limited to, all decisions regarding his health, education, religion, and welfare. Pursuant to the terms of this paragraph, each parent shall be entitled to all records and information pertaining to the child, including, but not limited to, school and medical records and information. 2. The mother shall have primary physical custody of the child. 3. The father may visit with the child only in the presence of his mother, Donna Marsh, until further Order of Court. The visits shall be every Thursday evening from after work until 8:00 p.m., and every Sunday from noon until 5:00 p.m. On Thursday father shall pick the child up at daycare and return the child to mother's residence. On Sunday he shall pick the child up and return the child to mother's residence. Donna Marsh shall be with him at all times. She shall pick the child up at or deliver the child to mother's door while father waits in the car. the presence visitation. Mother's husband, Charles Marsh, shall not be in of the child during these periods of supervised 4. It is suggested that father attend individual anger management counseling with a therapist approved by Debra Salem. The counselor should contact Ms. Salem to get input on the clinical issues to be addressed. We will consider ending supervised visitation upon receiving a report from the counselor that father has progressed in anger management counseling to the point where such supervised visitation is no longer necessary. 5. We have reviewed the father's exhibit number 1 and consider it to be a reasonable proposal for partial physical custody. We will consider implementing that schedule, or any other schedule agreed upon by the ]parties, when father is far enough along in anger management therapy to make it appropriate. A further hearing in this matter is scheduled for Friday, June 20, 2003, at 8:30 a.m. at which time we will hear testimony regarding how the supervised visitations have worked, and father's progress in anger management counseling. Provided, however, that if the parties have reached an agreement as to father's periods of partial physical custody, the hearing may be cancelled. By the Court, TRUE COPY ~OM In Testimony whereof, I her,-, tmto set my han~[ ,~--" - .....~'~ and t~ se~l of said~urt at C?riisle, Pa. Edward E. Guido, J. LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., PLAINTIFF DEANA L. MURLATT, DEFENDANT IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2002 - 4397 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY MOTION TO CONTINUE JUNE 20, 2003 HEARING SINCE EXPERT REPORT HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PA. R.C.P. 1915.8 (i) 1. On April 9, 2003 this Honorable Court entered gm Order attached as Exhibit "A" which provides for supervised visitation in accordance with a report and expert testimony by Debra Salem. 2. The April 9, 2003 at ¶4 provided that the "[court] will consider ending supervised visitation upon receiving a report from the counselor that father has progressed in anger management counseling to the point where such supervised visitation is no longer necessary". 3. A hearing is scheduled for June 20, 2003 at 8:30 AM. 4. As of June 9, 2003 Defendant has not been provided with any report from the anger management counselor. In addition, Defendant is not certain that the counselor has been advised of the Plalntifl's family history of domestic violence which was brought out in the heating on April 9, 2003. a. The history of domestic violence includes a Protection from Abuse Petition filed by Plaintiffs natural father against the Plaintiff in the summer of 2002; b. It includes a violation by Plaintiff of a Protection from Abuse Order less than eleven days after its entry in July 2002; c. It includes a history of domestic violence by Plaintiffs step-father against his natural mother including a beating with "wooden trash cart lid" and "scale" in Easter 2001 and August 2001; and d. A confrontation with New Cumberland Police Officer Joseph Spadaccino in July 2002. 5. Pa. R.C.P. 1915.8 (i) governs this situation and it provides that any report from an expert must be served upon the court and opposing party at least thirty (30) days before trial. In this case, the expert's report was due on May 20, 2003. 6. Plaintiffs counsel opposes any continuance of this matter. This motion was faxed to Plaintiffs counsel on June 9, 2003 at approximately 9:30 AM. 7. As of June 9, 2003 Plaintiffs counsel has not advised Defendant's counsel when - or if- a report is going to be provided by the anger management counselor. WHEREFORE, Defendant Deana L. Murlatt respectfully requests this Honorable Court to direct the anger management counselor to provide a written report at least thirty (30) days in advance of any hearing on this matter and continue the June 20, 2003 to a suitable date so the report can be timely reviewed by the parties and court. Respectfully submitted, /8feven Howell, tgsquire 619 Bridge Street New Cumberland, PA 17070 (717) 770.-1277 Supreme Court I.D. 62063 Attorney for Plaintiff Certificate of Service I hereby certify that on the date set forth below a tree and correct copy of the foregoing document was served upon all counsel of record via postage prepaid, first class United States Mail addressed as follows: Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Esquire Costopoulos & Welch P.O. Box 779 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055 Date: June 9, 2003 BY: ~t~ven Howell, L~squire LA/~ONT L. M3~HONEY, JR. , Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERL~dqD COUNTY, PEN-NSYLVA/qIA DEANA MURLATT, De f endant NO. 2002-~397 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY IN RE: TEMPORARY ORDEal ORDER OF COURT ARqD NOW, this 9th day of April, 2003, after hearing, it's hereby ordered and directed as follows: 1. The parties shall have shared legal custody of their child, Lamont L. Mahoney, III. born September 17, 2001. Each parent shall have equal right, to be exercised jointly with the other parent, to make all major non-emergency decisions affecting the child's general well being, including, but not limited to, all decisions regarding his health, education, religion, and welfare. Pursuant to the terms of this paragraph, each parent shall be entitled to all records and information pertaining to the child, including, but not limited to, school and medical records and information. 2. The mother shall have primary physical custody of the child. 3. The father may visit with the child only in the presence of his mother, Donna Marsh, until further Order of Court. .The visits shall be every Thursday evening from after work until 8:00 p.m., and every Sunday from noon until 5:00 p.m. On Thursday father shall pick the child up at daycare and return the child to mother's residence. On Sunday he shall pick the lild up and return the child to mother's residence. Donna ~rsh shall be with him at all times. She shall pick the child at or deliver the child to mother's door while father waits in the car. the presence of visitation. individual Mother's husband, Charles Marsh, shall not be in the child during these periods of supervised 4. It is suggested that father attend anger management counseling with a therapist approved by Debra Salem. The counselor should contact Ms. Salem to get input on the clinical issues to be addressed. We will consider ending supervised visitation upon receiving a report from the counselor that father has progressed in anger management counseling to the point where such supervised visitation is no longer necessary. 5. 1 and consider it physical custody. We have reviewed the father's exhibit number to be a reasonable proposal for partial We will consider implementing that schedule, or any other schedule agreed upon by the parties, when father is far enough along in anger management therapy to make it appropriate. A further hearing in this matter is scheduled for Friday, June 20, 2003, at 8:30 a.m., at which time we will hear testimony regarding how the supervised visitations have worked, and father's progress in anger management counseling. Provided, however, that if the parties harm reached an agreement as to father's periods of partial physical custody, the hearing may be cancelled. TRUE COPY FROM RECORD In Testimony whereof, I here unto set my hen4 andt~ seal of sa')d Court a,3,~-arlis!e, Pa. ~ By the Court, / ~ ~Edward E. Guido, LAMONT L. MAHONEY JR., Plaintiff VS. DEANA MURLATT, Defendant DNOW, s day of ,2003, it is ORDERED that Defendant's "Motion to Continue June 20, 2003 Hearing Since Expert Report Has Not Been : THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : : No. 20024397 CIVIL : : CIVIL ACTION - AT LAW : IN CUSTODY Provided in Accordance with Pa.R.C.P. § 1915.8(i)" ' 494, LAMONT L. MAHONEY, JR., : Plaintiff : DEANA MURLATT, : Defendant : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 2002-4397 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 20th day of June, 2003, we enter the following Order which shall replace any prior Order entered in this matter: 1. The parties shall have shared legal custody of their child, Lamont L. Mahoney, III, born September 17, 2001. Each parent shall have equal right, to be exercised jointly with the other parent, to make all major non-emergency decisions affecting the child's general well being, including, but not limited to, all decisions regarding his health, education, religion, and welfare. Pursuant to the terms of this paragraph, each parent shall be entitled to all records and information pertaining to the child, including, but not limited to, school and medical records and information. The Mother shall have primary physical custody of the child. 3. Father shall have periods of partial physical custody with his child as follows: A. On Saturday, June 21, 2003, until 8:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m. until Friday, B. On Sunday, June 29, 2003, C. On Thursday, July 3, July ~4, 2003, at noon. D. 2003, from 10:00 a.m. from 10:00 a.m. from after work Every other weekend from Friday at 6:00 p.m. until Sunday at 6:00 p.m. commencing Friday, July 11, 2003. E. Every Tuesday, from after work at 5:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m. 4. Each party shall be entitled to one week of exclusive custody of the child in the summer commencing the summer of 2004. The parties shall notify each other of the dates he or she intends to exercise such custody prior to May 1 of each year. 5. Father shall have partial physical custody of the child on the following holidays: Every Thanksgiving from 3:00 p.m. until ko 8:00 p.m. B. From noon Christmas day until 8:00 p.m. Christmas night in odd numbered years. C. From after work on Christmas eve, or if he is not working from 3:00 p.m. Christmas eve until noon Christmas day. D. The following holidays on an alternating basis from 9:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m.: Labor Day, New Years Day, Easter, Memorial Day, July 4. It is our intention that Mother shall have the child on those holidays upon which Father does not have him. The above holiday schedule shall supersede any regularly scheduled visitation. 6. If Mother's Day falls on Father's scheduled weekend, he shall return the child by 9:00 a.m. If Father's Day falls on a weekend that Father does not have the child, he shall be entitled to visit with the child from 9:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m. 7. The parties shall share the child's birthday as follows: A. child from 4:00 p.m. In odd numbered years, Mother shall have the until 6:00 p.m., and Father shall have the child from 6:00 p.m. until 8:00 p.m. In even numbered years, Father shall have the child from 5:30 p.m. until 7:30 p.m. This section shall supersede any other regularly scheduled visitation. 8. Father shall pick the child up at the commencement of his periods of partial custody at daycare or Mother's residence, as the case may be. He shall return the child to Mother's residence at the conclusion of visitation. 9. The parties shall keep each other informed of current addresses and phone numbers, both at work and at home. They shall also notify the party of any illness or accident or other serious circumstance affecting the welfare of the child while in said party's care and custody. 10. Both parties shall have the right to reasonable telephone contact with the child during the other party's period of custody. 11. Neither Father nor Mother shall make disparaging remarks regarding the other parent in the presence of the child. 12. For the next 60 days, on the days that Father does not have visitation with the child, Mother shall e-mail him something positive about the child. Father must then respond to said e-mail. On the days when Father has the child, he shall e-mail something positive to Mother regarding the child. Mother must respond. Copies of the e-mails sent and received shall be filed to this term and number to be made part of the record so that we can refer to them if the matter comes before us in the future. Jeanne B. Costopoulos, Attorney for Plaintiff Steven Howell, Esquire Attorney for Defendant srs Esquire