The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About95-06329 ,"'" rt ~ .~ " ; 'iiJ'\ 'cl"1 ..!J . "11 112001 PATRICIA METZGER, Pfalntlff/Re.pondent : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 85-6328 CIVIL TERM v. MICHAEL J. METZGER : CIVIL ACTION. LAW Defendant/Petitioner : IN CUSTODY (- , , t, "l,d.tjh . -H-;;._I""O ,,, ..u.~ ..'" .- Pre.Hearing Memorandum I, Michael Metzger, petitioned the Honorable Court on March 2, 2001, to find Patricia Metzger In Civil Contempt of the Cuatody Order dated 23 October 2000 (EncI1), A. a re.ult of my petition, a pre.hearing conciliation conference waa held on March 3D, 2001. The report of the Cu.tody Conciliator la attached (EncI2), I filed the attached petition after .endlng three lettera to re.pondent'a attomey, Mark Duffle, ESQ" documenting llriOU' .nd repeated breache. of tha Cu.tody Order. A. .tated In my petition, relpondent'. perfonnance of her duUea In tennl of the CUltody Order, which II an agreed Order approved by her attomey and heraelf, appeared to me to be getting worae. More Importantly, my child Mlchelle'l behavior .eema to be affected adveraely by mother'. haphuard perfonnance In that Michelle leeml to be more worried, withdrawn, and uplet a. lf Ihe wera relponllble for each breach, My po.ltlon II al followl: 1. Thla II my Ihlth petition for a finding of contempt In four yeara baaed on ralpondent'l refulal to adhere to varloua CUltody Ordere, both agreed and non. . .......~.... agraed. It doesn't seem to maUer which part of the transportation she Is responsible for fulfilling, or wllat the tlmeframes or schedulea are. She never complies, The reault has been a breakdown of constructive communication, the elimination of trust, and the Indirect Involvemant of our child In the conflict, The attached report documents that I stili believe It Is possible to agree on a Custody Order and visitation schedule that I. onerous to neither party, but respondent refuaea to wort< with me or the Court's Conciliator, Respondent hopes that the currant agread Order will be vacated, and that we will revert to the honorable Court'. Order dated May 26th, 2000, However, she violated the term. of that Order Juat like all the rest. She agreed to the currant Order at a conciliation hearing held on September 26th, 2000 because she did not adhere to the Order which wa. then In place, and .he had no reasonable answer to my complaints or the Conciliator'. question., I am not asking the Court to Impose a new Cu.tody Order, or to vacate the current Order, as I believe only an agreed Order has any chanc. of wort<lng, My grantest hope Is that visitation become. timely and regular, without complication., stras., or trouble, Respondent I. recalcitrant. She I. habitually late, argumentative and careless, She conveys, by her actions and word., contempt for Ordera of Court and for the relatlon.hlp between my daughter and I that all the Ordera wsre meant to preserve, 2. The facts surrounding respondent's delinquency are not In question. As shown In the Conciliator's report, respondent admits to being late. The excuses offered In defense are weak, The "traffic" excuse Is most frequently used, but 2 reapondent haa arrived much earlier than expected on a number of occaslona, She choae the arrival time, knowing full well what traffic conditions are likely to exlat. I have never encountered delays of more than 10 minutes when traveling the aame route at the same time of day. It was clear from her demeanor In the two conferences held by the Court's Custody Conciliator that she does not believe adherence to the Order Is mandatory and she has promlaed more "problema," I will Introduce Into evidence an Ex Parte le<<er wrl<<en by reapondent to the Conciliator In which she Indicates the visitation probleml will continue. I will ahow that her failure to comply with the Order II willful, thereby eatablllhlng a legal balls for a finding of Contempt. The only wltneal I will call la my wife, Stephanie Kallna.Metzger, who will testify about respondent's failure to adhere to the vlaltatlon Ichedule and the provocative and careleaa tone of reapondent'a communlcatlonl. She will testify that the only communlcatlonl received from reapondent alwaya Involve dlmlnlahlng my time with my daughter, I Intend to produce In evidence the le<<era I have wrl<<en to reapondent's attomey, which document my clalml about respondent's delinquent behavior and her haraallng communlcatlonl, I will alao Introduce Into evidence a recording from my anlwerlng machine that will allow the Court to hear the offhanded manner In which Ihe deprives me of contact with my child, My adult daughter Mary Metzger II frequently her mother' a dellgnee to transport Michelle, even though mother II available to carry out transportation, I will show, on cross.examlnatlon, reapondent has damaged my relationship with my adult daughter by Involving her In vllltatlon arrangements, Respondent and Mary have a<<empted to re.negotlate 1 , . the vllltatlon achedule for 10 of the 12 vllltatlon periods covered In my complaint. The purpose of bringing Michelle late Is to enable Mary to be the tranlportatlon dealgnee or to accommodate Mary's college schedule and recreational planl. Thll has relulted In Michelle's late arrival and hal drawn Mary Into ths conflict. 3. I have been denied summer vllltatlon (two three.week blockl) by relpondent. At thll hearing, I will alk that the honorable Court continue bl.weekly vllltatlon (beyond the time when It would normally ceale owing to the Ichool lummer vacation) and grant me a block of three weeka commencing 4 Augult 2001. I have been denied the opportunity to plan for Mlchelle'l care during tha earty lummer. or to plan a vacation with her, or to arrange for her to be engagad In any lort of enrtchlng activity durtng an earty aummer pertod of cUltody. At thll late date, Michelle would be better off at home becaule I have been denied a chance to make any arrangementl for Mlchella'l benefit. I further pray the Court require mother to tranlport Michelle at the beginning and end of all thele vlaltatlon pertoda durtng the .ummer, Ilnce I dread the complicated negotlatlonl that .eem to be required at each exchange of cUltody, I requlat no modification of the cu.....nt Order, but I relpectfully requeat Ipeclel relief In the matter of thll year'. .ummer .chldule, WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Michael Metzgsr, relpsctfully reque.tl the Court find relpondent In Contempt, and that the Court Impole a remedy dlalgned to 4 OCT 2 02lJOObIJ vs, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO, 95-6329 PATRICIA METZGER, Plalnliff/Respondenl MICHAEL J, METZGER. DefendanUPelltloner CIVIL ACTION. LAW CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 23 day of c()c.tob e R , 2000, upon conslderalion of the allached Custody Conciliation Summary Report, It 15 hereby dlrecled and ordered as follows: 1, Legal Custody, The parties, Patricia Metzger and Michael J. Metzger, shall have shared legal custody of the minor Child, Michelle Julie Metzger, born March 3, 19BB, 2, Physical Custody, Mother shall have primary physical cuslody; Father shall have partial physical custody on alternating weekends, Mother shall deliver the Child to Falher by B:OO PM on Friday evenings and Father shall return the Child home to Mother by 5:00 Sunday evening. If Monday Is a school holiday, the period shall extend to Monday evening at 5:00 PM, 3, Holidays, A. ThanksglvinQ, Father shall have Thanksgiving every year from 10:00 AM the day after Thanksgiving unlilthe Sunday f;:,lIowing Thanksgiving at 5:00 PM, Mother shall have Michelle each Thanksgiving Day, B. Christmas, Father shall have the Child from December 25th at1 :30 PM unlil January 31s1 at 3:00 PM, Mother shall have Michelle each Chrlslmas Eve and each Christmas morning, C, Summer Vacalion, Father shall have temporary physical custody during the summer vacalion period each year for six weeks In two three-week continuous segmenls, The limes each year for these segments shall be set by the parties no later than June 1 sl. D, Other Holidays, The parties shall quickly adJuslthls custody schedule so Michelle can obselVe the following holidays with her Mother: Rosh Hashanah (Seplember), Yom Kippur (Seplember or October), Hannukkah (November or December), pym (February or March), and Pesach (March or Aprll- first and second days). ~~\<O No, 95-6329 4. Neither party shall do or say anylhlng which may eslrange the child from the olher parent, injure the opinion of Ihe Child DS 10 the other parent, or hamper the free and nalural development of the Child's love and respect for the other parent Each parenl shall ensure Ihatthlrd parties also comply with this provision during his or her periods of custody, 5, Transportation, The Father, or his designee, shall transport Michelle at the end 01 each of his temporary custodial periods and Ihe Molher, or her designee, shall provide Ihe transportation at the conclusion of her period of custody. It shall be acceptable for Katie While to provide transportation In the evenlthat Mother Is not able to do so, In light of Ihe physical distance between the parties, communicalion may be necessary wilh regards to delays In travel times due to road and weather conditions, Therefore, the parties are encouraged to make use of Father's cell phone number and voice mall In the event that road or weather conditions will delay the expecled arrival or departure time, 6, RespondenUMother Is advised that this Court takes very seriously her responsibility In maintaining and providing transportation so that the Child may maintain a relationship wllh the Petitioner/Father, Therefore, additional occurrences of Mother's failure to deliver the Child to Father In a timely fashion for his custodial periods shall be referred to this Court by Ihe Conciliator for a conlempt hearing wherein Mother may be subject to a fine, probation, or Imprisonment as provided at 23 Pa. C,S, ~ 4346. 7. Mother shall be required 10 appear in person for any subsequent hearing or pre- hearing conferences In the above-referenced maller, BY THE COURT, /5/~lIJ If. ~ g/ Edgar Bayley, J. ) 'I Dlst: Mark C, Duffle, 301 Market Slreat, PO Boo 109, Lemoyne, PA 17043.0109 Michael Metzger, Pro Se, 2000 Lewis Street, Harrisburg, PA 17110 . TRW: COpy FROM RECORD In . : I .."my whereof, I here unlo sot my hand and the seal of sal court~atle, Pa, Thl ......2,3. f:... ....q.....,~" rJr'" . , ~.. ~othonotllY . ..' PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO, 95-6329 Defendant CIVIL ACTION. LAW CUSTODY MICHAEL J. METZGER, CUSTODY CONCILIATION SUMMARY REPORI IN ACCORDANCE WITH CUMBERLAND COUNTY RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1915,~.8, the undersigned Custody Conciliator sub mils the following report: 1, The pertinent Information concerning the Child who Is Ihe subject of this litigation Is as follows: NAME Michelle Julie Metzger DATE OF BIRTH March 3, 1988 CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF Mother 2. The parties were seen for their third Custody Conciliation Conference with the Conciliator on April 30, 2001, upon the filing of Father's petllion for conlempt which was filed on March 28, 2001. The last Order of Court was dated October 23,2000. Present at the Conference were the Mother, Patricia Melzger, and Michael J, Metzger, Each party appeared pro se. 3, The parties were seen previously on September 26, 2000 for a Conciliation Conference following Father having filed a Contempt Petition, Father had alleged that Mother had failed to follow the Order In a number of occurrences during the summer of 2000. Father perceived this as an effort by Mother to minimize his contact with the Child, Molher participated In the Conciliation Conference by telephone and was represented by counsel at the time, She agreed to a modification of the Order which would then require her to provide the transportation on Friday evenings, This modification was made because Falher's arrival to pick up the Child on Friday nights after work and a drive to pick up the child In Maryland would have him arriving In Harrisburg with the Child very late on Friday nights of his custodial weekend, It was hoped that by allowing Mother to provide the transportation on Friday nights the Child would arrive earlier for her cuslodlal weekends with Falher and therefore allowing longer visits and a more reasonable bedtime, 4. Father's present petition alleges there have been numerous times subsequent to Ihe change In Order when Mother has been late In producing the Child on Friday nights. On at least two occasions he alleges that she has been late by more than thirteen hours, Father claims to have sent correspondence to both Mother and to her prior counsel regarding her repeated lateness In producing the Child for his custodial visits. He alleges thet he received no response to the letters, elJC~ .' ... No, 95.6329 Addillonally, Father complains that he can hear Molher in Ihe background when he calls the Child on Ihe telephone, that the Child has been Involved In the parties' dispute with regard to her schedule, that Mother yells and curses at Father on the phone at limes when the Child may be present, that Mother fails to share Informallon wllh regard to the Child's progress In school, Ihat Mother frequently expects Father to change the schedule to accommodate her holidays, that Mother's failure to produce the Child is harmful 10 his relallonshlp with his Daughter. Father would like Mother to follow the schedule as It Is presently arranged and keep the Child from getting upset about the schedule, 5. Mother stated that she did not know why the Order was changed to require her to provide Friday night pickups despite the fact that she agreed to this al the previous Cuslody Conclllallon Conference. She claims that the reason she Is frequently late Is because of heavy traffic getting out of the busy area of Maryland where she resides and to Father's home by 8:00 p.m. Mother also acknowledges there was one occasion when she was sick and did not feel like driving to bring the Child to Father, Therefore, she waited until Saturday of Father's custodial weekend to bring the Child. On a second occasion, the traffic was so bad that she decided to walt and come up Saturday morning, She additionally reports that the Child has been crying because the parties will not communicate with each other, that Father does not answer her telephone calls and does not return calls after she has left a message, She would like to have the previous Order of Court when Judge Bayley required that Father provide all transportation on Friday evenings, 6, The Conciliator worked extensively with these very angry parents In an attempt to mediate a resolullon to their connlct around transportallon, the holiday schedule and the summer schedule, Ulllmately, despite some apparent progress with regard to the summer schedule and some discussions about allernallves for mid-point meellng places for custodial exchanges, Mother SUbsequently refused to make any concessions and wishes to return to Judge Bayley's prior Order. Mother also stated her desire for the Court to order an evaluation of Father. 7, Father refused to withdrew his Contempt Pelltlon and Insists that Mother ellher follow the present Order or agrees to a halfway meellng point for the weekend custodial exchanges, Therefore, It is necessary for the parties to have a hearing before Judge Bayley. A hearing in this matter will take approximately one hour, 0/1),1 G~2 !:J , Dale Mellss~ Peel GreeVy\~ulrcV Custody Conciliator agreed. It doesn't Seem to matter which part of the transportation she la responsible for fulfilling, or what the tlmeframes or echedules are. She never compile., The result has been a breakdown of constructive communication, the elimination of trust, and the Indirect Involvement of our child In the conflict. The atteched report documents that I stili believe It Is possible to agree on a Custody Ordar and vl.ltatlon schedule that Is onerous to neither party, but respondent refu.e. to wortt with me or the Court'. Conciliator. ~espondent hope. that the current agreed Order will be vacated, and that we will revert to the honorable Court'. Order dated May 25'h, 2000. However, she vlol.ted the term. of that Order Juat like all the reat. She agreed to the current Order at a conciliation hearing held on September 26'h, 2000 because she did not adhere to tha Order which waa then In place, and she had no rea.onable an.wer to my complaint. or the Conciliator'. que.tlona. I am not asking the Court to Impo.e a hllW Cu.tody Order, or to vacate the current Order, aa I believe only an agreed Order haa any chance of worttlng. My gre.teat hope Is that visitation become. timely and regular, without complications, stres., or trouble. Respondent la recalcitrant. She la habitually late, argumentative and careles.. She convey., by her action. and words, contempt for Ordere of Court and for the relation. hip between my daughter and I that all the Order. Were meant to preserve, 2. The fact. .urroundlng respondent's delinquency are not In question. A. ahown In the Conciliator's report, respondent admits to being late. The excu.ea offered In defense are weak. The "traffic" eXcUle II mOlt frequently uaed, but 2 reapondent haa arrived much earlier than ellpected on a number of occaalona. She choae the arrival time, knowing full well what traffic condltlona are likely to elllat. I have never encountered delays of more than 10 minutes when traveling the same route at the 88me time of day. It was clear from her demeanor In the two conferencea held by the Court's Custody Conciliator that ahe doea not believe adherence to the Order Is mandatory and she haa promised more "problema." I will Introduce Into evidence an Ell Parte leUer written by reapondent to the Conciliator In which she Indlcatea the vlaltatlon problema will continue. I will ahow that her failure to comply with the Order la willful, thereby eatabllahlng a legal basis for a finding of Contempt, The only wltne.a I will can la my wife, Stephanie Kallna.Metzger, who will testify about reapondent'a failure to adhere to the visitation schedule and the provocative and carelesa tone of reapondent'. communlcatlona. She will testify that the only communication. received from re.pondent always Involve diminishing my time with my daughter. I Intend to produce In evidence the letters I have written to reapondent'a attomey, which document my clalma about respondent's delinquent behavior and her harasalng communications. I will also Introduce Into evidence a recording from my anawerlng machine that will allow the Court to hear the offhanded manner In which .he deprives me of contact with my child. My adult daughter Mary Metzger la freqUently her mother's designee to tranaport Michelle, even though mother la available to carry out transportation, I will show, on cross.ellamlnatlon, re.pondent has damaged my relationship with my adult daughter by Involving her In vlsltetlon arrangement.. Respondent and Mary have attempted to re.negotlate 3 the vleltatlon echedule for 10 of the 12 vlaltatlon perl ode covered In my complaint, Tha purpoee of bringing Michelle late Is to enable Mary to be the traneportatlon designee or to accommodate Mary'e college echedule and recreational plane. Thle hes reeulted In Mlchelle'e late arrival and hae drawn Mary Into the conflict. 3. I have been denied eummer vllltatlon (two three-week blocke) by reepondent. At thla hearing, I will aek that the honorable Court continue bl-weekly visitation (beyond the time when It would normally ceaee owing to the echool eummer vacation) and grant me a block of three weeke commencing .. Auguet 2001. I have bean denied the opportunity to plan for Mlchelle'e care during tha earty eummer, or to plan a vacation with her, or to arrange for her to be engaged In any eort of enrtchlng activity during an early eummer period of custody. At thla late date, Michelle would be beUer off at homa because I have been denied a chance to make any arrange mente for Michelle's benefit. I further pray the Court require mother to transport Michelle at the beginning and end of all thesa visitation pari ode durtng the summer, Ilnce I dread the complicated negotlatlona that seem to be required at aach exchange of custody. I request no modification of the current Order, but I respectfully request special relief In the maUer of this year'e aummer schedule. WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Michael Metzger, respectfully requests the Court find respondent In Contempt, and that the Court Impole a remedy dealgned to 4 OCT 2 0 200fJ f>l7 vs, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO, 95-6329 PATRICIA METZGER, Plalnllff/Respondent MICHAEL J. METZGER. DefendanUPetllloner CIVIL ACTION. LAW CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 23 day of c()c.tob e R , 2000, upon conslderalion of the allached Custody Conclliallon Summary Report, It Is hereby directed and ordered as follows: 1, Legal Custody. The parties, Patricia Melzger and Michael J, Metzger, shall have shared legal custody of the minor Child, Michelle Julie Metzger, born March 3, 1988, 2, physical Custody, Molher shall have primary physical custody; Father shall have partial physical custody on alternallng weekends, Mother shall deliver the Child to Falher by 8:00 PM on Friday evenings and Falher shall return the Child home to Mother by 5:00 Sunday evening, If Monday Is a school holiday, the period shall extend to Monday evening at 5:00 PM. 3, Holidays, A, Thanksgiving, Falher shall have Thanksgiving every year from 10:00 AM the day after Thanksgiving until the Sunday following Thanksgiving at 5:00 PM, Mother shall have Michelle each Thanksgiving Day, B. Christmas, Falher shall have the Child from December 25th at1:30 PM until January 31st at 3:00 PM, Mother shall have Michelle each Christmas Eve and each Christmas morning, C, Summer Vacallon, Father shall have temporary physical custody during the summer vacallon period each year for six weeks In two three.week conllnuous segments, The limes each year for these segmenls shall be set by the parties no laler than June 1 sl. D, OIher Holidays, The parties shall quickly adJust this custody schedule so Michelle can observe Ihe following holidays with her Molher: Rosh Hashenah (Seplember), Yom Kippur (September or October), Hannukkah (November or December), pym (February or March), and pesach (Marcy or April. first and second days). \ I \ \;\JV\: No. 95.6329 4, Neither party shall do or say anylhlng which may eslrange the child from Ihe other parent, Injure the opinion of Ihe Child as to the olher parent, or hamper Ihe free and natural development of Ihe Child's love and respect for the olher parent. Each parent shall ensure Ihatthlrd parties also comply wllh this provision during his or her periods of cuslody, 5, Transportation, The Falher, or his designee, shall transport Michelle at the end of each of his temporary cuslodlal periods and the Molher, or her designee, shall provide the transportation at the conclusion of her period of cuslody, It shail be acceplable for Katie White to provide transportation In Ihe evenlthal Molher Is nol able to do so, In light of the physical distance between the parties, communication may be necessary with regards to delays In travel times due to road and weather conditions, Therefore, the parties are encouraged to make use of Father's cell phone number and voice mall In the eventlhat road or weather conditions will delay the expecled arrival or departure time, 6. RespondenVMother Is advised that this Court takes very seriously her responslbillly In maintaining and providing transportalion so that the Child may maintain a relationship wilh the Petitioner/Father, Therefore, additional occurrences of Mother's failure to deliver the Child to Father In a timely fashion for his custodial periods shall be referred to this Court by the Conciliator for a conlempt hearing wherein Molher may be subject to a fine, probation, or Imprisonment as provided at 23 Pa, C,S, ~ 4346, 7, Mother shall be required to appear In person for any subsequent hearing or pre- hearing conferences In the above-referenced maller, BY THE COURT, 15/~~AJ A & !{/ Edgar ayley, J. ~ I Olsl: Mark c, Duffle, 301 Merkel Slreel. po Box 109, Lemoyne, PA 17043.0109 Mlchaal Matzger. Pro 6e, 2000 Lewis Street. Harrisburg, PA 17110 . TR"': COpy FROM RECORD In ' 'I ,,".IIIy whereof, I here unto set my hand and the seal of sal Court >>-\~Ie, Pa, Thl ,..,..2,3, f..~........'.., 4 .... . , , ~.. l'fothonotllY ' .. MICHAEL J. METZGER, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO, 95-6329 CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff vs, ~USTODY CONCILIATION SUMMARY REPORT IN ACCORDANCE WITH CUMBERLAND COUNTY RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1915.3-6, 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 Michelle Julie Metzger DATE OF BIRTH March 3, 1988 CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF Mother 2. The parties were seen for their third Custody Conciliation Conference with the Conciliator on April 30, 2001, upon the filing of Father's petition for contempt which was filed on March 28, 2001. The last Order of Court was dated October 23, 2000, Present at the Conference were the Mother, Patricia Metzger, and Michael J. Metzger, Each party appeared pro se. 3. The parties were seen previously on September 26, 2000 for a Conciliation Conference following Father having filed a Contempt Petition. Father had alleged that Molher had failed to follow the Order In a number of occurrences during the summer of 2000. Fathar perceived this as an effort by Mother to minimize his contact with the Child, Mother participated In the Conciliation Conference by telephone and was represented by counsel at the time. She agreed to a modification of the Order which would then require her to provide the transportation on Friday evenlnga. This modification waa made because Father's arrival to pick up the Child on Friday nights after work and a drive to pick up the child In Maryland would have him arriving In Harrisburg with the Child very late on Friday nights of his custodial weekend. It was hoped that by allowing Mother to provide the transportation on Friday nights the Child would arrive earlier for her custodial weekends with Falher and therefore allowing longer visits and a more reasonable bedtime, 4, Father's present petition alleges there have been numerous times subsequent to the change In Order when Mother has been late In producing the Child on Friday nights, On at least two occasions he alleges that she has been late by more than thirteen hours, Father claims to have sent correspondence to both Mother and to her prior counsel regarding her repeated lateness In producing the Child for his custodial visits, He alleges that he re~d no response to the letters, ~ ~~ (!}J . .. No. 95-6329 Addlllonally, Falher complains that he can hear Mother In the background when he calls the Child on the telephone, that the Child has been Involved In the parties' dispute wllh regard to her schedule, thai Mother yells and curses at Father on the phone at times when the Child may be present, that Mother falls to share Information with regard to the Child's progress In school, that Molher frequently expects Father to change the schedule to accommodate her holidays, that Mother's failure to produce the Child Is harmful 10 his relationship wllh his Daughter. Father would like Mother to follow the schedule as Ills presently arranged and keep Ihe Child from oetting upsel about the schedule, 5, Mother stated that she did not know why the Order was changed to require her to provide Friday night pickups despite the facl that she agreed 10 this at tre previous Custody Conciliation Conference. She claims that the reason she Is frequently late Is because of heavy traffic getting out of the busy area of Maryland where she resides and to Father's home by 8:00 p,m. Mother also acknowledges there was one occasion when she was sick and did not feel like driving to bring the Child to Father, Therefore, she waited until Saturday of Father's custodial weekend to bring the Child. On a second occasion, the traffic was so bad that she decided to walt and come up Saturday morning, She addlllonally reports that the Child has been crying because the parties will not communicate with each other, that Father does not answer her telephone calls and does not relurn calls after she has left a message, She would like to have the previous Order of Court when Judge Bayley required that Father provide all transportation on Friday evenings. 6. The Conciliator worked extensively wllh these very angry parents In an attempt to mediate a resolution to their conflict around transportallon, the holiday schedule and the summer schedule, Ulllmately, despite some apparent progress with regard to the summer schedule and some discussions about alternatives for mid-point meeting placea for custodial exchanges, Mother subsequently refused to make any concessions and wishes to return to Judge Bayley's prior Order, Molher also stated her desire for the Court to order an evaluation of Father, 7, Father refused to withdraw his Contempt Pelltlon and Insists that Mother either follow the present Order or agrees to a halfway meeting point for the weekend custodial exchanges, Therefore, It Is necessary for the parties to have a hearing before Judge Bayley, A hearing In this matter will take approxlmalely one hour, ~;6'1 Mellss Peel Greevy, Custody Conciliator Date agraed. It doesn't seem to matter which part of the transportation she I. responsible for fulfilling, or what the tlmeframes or schedules are. She never complies, The result has been a breakdown of constructive communication, the elimination of trust, and the Indirect Involvement of our child In the conflict. The attached report documents that I stili believe It Is possible to agree on a Custody Order and visitation schedule that Is onerous to neither party, but respondent refuses to wol1t with me or the Court's Conciliator. Respondent hopes that the current agreed Order will be vacated, and that we will revert to the honorable Court's Order dated May 25th, 2000, However, she violated the term. of that Order Ju.t like all the rest, She agreed to the current Order at a conciliation hearing held on September 26'h, 2000 because she did not adhere to the Order which wa. then In place, and she had no reasonable answer to my complaints or the Conciliator'. questions. I am not asking the Court to Impose a new Custody Order, or to vacate the current Order, aa I believe only an agreed Order has any chsnce of wol1tlng. My greatest hope Is that visitation becomes timely and regular, without complications, stre8S, or trouble. Respondent I. recalcitrant. She Is habitually late, argumentative and careless. She convey., by her actions and words, contempt for Ordera of Court and for the relationship between my daughter and I that all the Ordera ware meant to preserve, 2, The facts surrounding respondent's delinquency are not In question, As shown In the Conciliator's report, respondent admits to being late, The eXCuses offered In defense are weak. The "traffic" excuse Is most frequently used, but 2 respondent has arrived much earlier than expected on a number of occasions, She chose the arrival time, knowing full well what traffic conditions are likely to exist. I have never encountered delays of more than 10 minutes when traveling the urns route at the same time of day. It was clear from her demeanor In tha two conferencea held by the Court's Custody Conciliator that she does not believe adherence to the Order Is mandatory and she has promised more "problems." I will Introduce Into evidence an Ex Parte letter written by reapondent to the Conciliator In which she Indicates the visitation problems will continue. I will show that her failure to comply with the Order Is willful, thereby establishing a legal basis for a finding of Contempt. The only wltnss. I will call la my wife, Stephanie Kallna.Metzger, who will testify about respondent'. failure to adhere to the visitation schedule and the provocative and carel e.. tone of re.pondent'. communication.. She will testify that the only communication. received from respondent always Involve diminishing my time with my daughter. I Intend to produce In evidence the lettere I have written to r88pondent'. attorney, which document my claims about respondent's delinquent behavior and her hara..lng communication.. I will also Introduce Into evidence a recording from my an.werlng machine that will allow the Court to hear the offhanded manner In which she deprive. me of contact with my child. My adult daughter Mary Metzger la frequently her mother's designee to transport Michelle, even though mother I. avellable to carry out transportation. I will show, on cro.s.examlnatlon, respondent ha. damaged my relationship with my adult daughter by Involving her In vlsltetlon arrangement.. Respondent and Mary have attempted to re.negotlate l the vllltatlon schedule for 10 of the 12 visitation perl ode covered In my complslnt. The purpose of bringing Michelle late Is to enable Mary to be the transportetlon designee or to accommodate Mary's college schedule and recreational plana. This has resulted In Michelle's late arrival and haa drawn Mery Into the conflict. 3. I have been denied summer visitation (two three.week blocks) by reapondent. At thla hearing, I will ask that the honorable Court continue bl.weekly vlaltatlon (beyond the time when It would normally cease owing to the school summer vacation) snd grant me a block of three weeks commencing 4 August 2001. I have been denied the opportunity to plan for Michelle's carl during the earty eummer, or to plan a vacetlon with her, or to arrange for her to be engaged In any sort of enriching activity during an early summer period of custody. At this late date, Michelle would be better off at home because I have been denied a chance to make any arrangements for Michelle's benefit. I further pray the Court require mother to transport Michelle at the beginning and end of all theae vlaltatlon periods during the summer, since I dread the complicated negotlatlona that slim to be required at each exchange of custody. I requeat no modification of the current Order, but I respectfully request special relief In the matter of thla year'a summer schedule. WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Michael Metzger, respectfully requeata the Court find respondent In Contempt, and that the Court Impose a remedy dealgned to 4 OCT 2 02000blJ vs, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO, 95-6329 PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff/Respondent MICHAEL J. METZGER, DefendanUPelilioner CIVIL ACTION. LAW CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 23 day of tcJc.tob e ~ , 2000, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Summary Report, Ills hereby directed and ordered as follows: 1, Legal Custody, The parties, Patricia Metzger and Michael J, Metzger, shall have shared legal custody of the minor Child, Michelle Julie Metzger, born March 3, 1988, 2, Physical Custody. Mother shall have primary physical custody; Father shall have partial physical custody on alternaling weekends, Mother shall deliver the Child to Father by 8:00 PM on Friday evenings and Falher shall return the Child home to Mother by 5:00 Sunday evening, If Monday is a school holiday, the period shall extend to Monday evening at 5:00 PM, 3, Holidays. A, ThanksglvlnQ. Father shall have Thanksgiving every year from 10:00 AM the day after Thanksgiving until the Sunday following Thanksgiving at 5:00 PM. Mother shall have Michelle each Thanksgiving Day, B, Christmas. Falher shall have Ihe Child from December 25th at 1 :30 PM until January 31st at 3:00 PM, Mother shall have Michelle each Christmas Eve and each Christmas morning. C, Summer Vacation, Father shall have temporary physical custody during the summer vacation period each year for six weeks In two three-week continuous segmenls, The times each year for these segments shall be set by the parties no later than June 1st. D. Other Holidays, The parties shall quickly adjust this custody schedule so Michelle can observe the following holidays with her Mother: Rosh Hashanah (Seplember), Yom Kippur (Seplember or October), Hannukkah (November or December), pym (February or March), and Pesach (March or April. first and second days), ...\ r;\ ~\JV\\.Y No, 95.6329 4. Neither party shall do or say anylhlng which may estrange the child from the olher parenl, Injure the opinion of Ihe Child as to the olher parent, or hamper Ihe free and natural developmenl of the Child's love and respect for the olher parent. Each parenl shall ensure that third parties also comply wllh this provision during his or her periods of custody, 5, Transportation, The Falher, or his designee, shall Iransport Michelle althe end of each of his lemporary custodial periods and Ihe Molher, or her designee, shall provide the transportation at the conclusion of her period of custody, It shall be acceptable for Katie White 10 provide transportation In Ihe eventlhat Molher Is nol able 10 do so, In Iighl of the physical dlslance between the parties, communication may be necessary wilh regards to delays In travel times due to road and weather conditions, Therefore, the parties are encouraged to make use of Father's cell phone number and voice mall In the event that road or weather conditions will delay the expected arrival or departure time. 6, RespondenUMother Is advised that this Court takes very seriously her responsibility In maintaining and providing Iransportalion so thai the Child may maintain a relationship wllh Ihe Petitioner/Father, Therefore, additional occurrences of Mother's failure to deliver the Child to Falher In a timely fashion for his custodial periods shall be referred to Ihls Court by the Conciliator for a contempt hearing wherein Mother may be subject to a fine, probation, or Imprisonment as provided at 23 Pa. C,S, ~ 4346, 7, Mother shall be required to appear In person for any subsequent hearing or pre- hearing conferences In the above-referenced malter. BY THE COURT, 15/;;~J A /k g/ Edgar ayley, J, ~ i Dlst: Mark C, Duffie, 301 Markel Streel, PO Box 100, Lemoyna, PA 17043.0100 Michael Metzoer, Pro Se, 2000 Lewis Slreet. Herrlsburg, PA 17110 , TR"': COpy FROM RECORD In , : I "..my whereof, I here unto set my hand end the seal of SIll Court ~~Ie, Pa. Thl ,....,,2,3. ';'" ............~" ~.., . , ~.. f'fothonotl/Y ' .. PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Defendant NO, 95-6329 CIVIL ACTION. LAW CUSTODY vs, MICHAEL J. METZGER, 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 Michelle Julie Metzger DATE OF BIRTH March 3, 1988 j::URRENTL V IN CUSTODY OF Mother 2. The parties were seen for their third Custody Conciliation Conference with the Conciliator on April 30. 2001, upon the filing of Father's petlllon for contempt which was filed on March 28, 2001, The last Order of Court was daled October 23, 2000, Present at the Conference were the Mother, Patricia Metzger, and Michael J, Metzger. Each party appeared pro 59, 3, The parties were seen previously on September 26, 2000 for a Conciliation Conference following Father having filed a Contempt Petition. Father had alleged that Mother had failed to follow the Order in a number of occurrences during the summer of 2000. Father perceived this as an effort by Mother to minimize his contact with the Child. Mother participated In the Conciliation Conference by telephone and was represented by counsel at the time. She agreed to a modification of the Order which would then require her to provide the transportation on Friday evenings, This modification was made because Father's arrival to pick up the Child on Friday nights after work and a drive to pick up the child In Maryland would have him arriving In Harrisburg wllh the Child very late on Friday nights of his custodial weekend. It was hoped that by allowing Mother to provide the transportallon on Friday nights the Child would arrive earlier for her custodial weekends wllh Father and therefore allowing longer visits and a more reasonable bedtime, 4, Father's present petition alleges there have been numerous times subsequent 10 the change In Order when Mother has been lale in producing the Child on Friday nights, On at least two occasions he alleges that she has been late by more than thirteen hours, Father claims to have sent correspondence to bolh Mother and to her prior counsel regarding her repeated lateness In producing the Child for his custodial visits, He alleges that he received no response to the letters, ~ tJcl @) . .. No. 95-6329 AddillonallY, Falher complains that he can hear Mother In the background when he calls the Child on the telephone, that the Child has been involved in Ihe parties' dispute wllh regard to her schedule, Ihat Mother yells and curses at Father on Ihe phone at limes when the Child may be present, that Mother falls 10 share informallon wllh regard to the Child's progress In school, thai Mother frequenlly expects Father 10 change the schedule to accommodale her holidays, that Mother's failure to produce the Child Is harmful to his relationship with his Daughter, Father would like Mother to follow the schedule as Ills presenlly arranged and keep the Child from getting upset about the schedule, 5. Mother stated that she did not know why the Order was changed to require her to provide Friday night pickups desplle the fact that she agreed to this at the previous Custody Conciliation Conference. She claims that the reason she Is frequenlly late Is because of heavy traffic getting out of Ihe busy area of Maryland where she resides and to Fathers home by 8:00 p,m. Mother also acknowledges there was one occasion when she was sick and did not feel like driving to bring the Child to Father. Therefore, she waited until Saturday of Father's custodial weekend to bring the Child, On a second occasion, the traffic was so bad that she decided to walt and come up Saturday morning, She addlllonally reports that the Child has been crying because the parties will not communicate with each other, that Father does not answer her telephone calls and does not return calls after she has left a message, She would like to have the previous Order of Court when Judge Bayley required that Father provide all transportation 011 Friday evenings, 6. The Conciliator worked extensively with these very angry parents In an attempt to mediate a resolution to their connlct around transportation, the holiday schedule and the summer schedule, Ulllmately, despite some apparent progress with regard to the summer schedule and some discussions about alternallves for mid-point meeting pieces for custodial exchanges, Mother subsequenlly refused to make any concessions and wishes to return to Judge Bayley's prior Order, Mother also stated her desire for the Court to order an evaluallon of Father, 7. Father refused to withdraw his Contempt pellllon and Insists that Mother either follow the present Order or agrees to a halfway meellng point for the weekend custodial exchanges, Therefore, It Is necessary for the parties to have a hearing before JUdge Bayley. A hearing In this matter will take approxlmalely one hour, ~/D) Cd; . ~ - to_, Dale Mellss~~~,\i~~lro/ Custody Conciliator I r I I I ..',j II................. . " ~" . I , _. - r - ..' I L' q \opt ~ .~1A~..... +t lot l . '. '.." ' ,~. - '. 'Ia' d" .i.'(;1 . \~ 0 ~ ' ~ .... -(:!.. f'--t " , "'9,', - ,... ); 'J!Z ~' '" C, ~ fJ ;.........'.~..... '.' '... .. ~'-e , . '-ll ..J , \. ~. ~ ~ ~ l' .~ ~ ~ (: ~ - v ~ '. '-...J ~ fL agreed. It doesn't seem to matter which part of the transportation she Is responsible for fulfilling, or what the tlmeframes or schedules are. She never complies, The result has been a breakdown of constructive communication, the elimination of trust, and the Indirect Involvement of our child In the conflict. The a"ached report documents that I stili believe It Is possible to agree on a Custody Order and visitation schedule that Is onerous to neither party, but respondent refuse. to work with me or the Court's Conciliator, Respondent hopes that the current agreed Order will be vacated, and that we will revert to the honorable Court'. Order dated May 261h, 2000. However, she violated the terma of that Order just like all the rest. She agreed to the current Order at a conciliation hearing held on September 261h, 2000 because she did not adhere to the Order which wa. then In place, and she had no reasonable answer to my complaints or the Conciliator'. question.. I am not asking the Court to Impose a new Custody Order, or to vacate the current Order, as I believe only an agreed Order has any chance of working. My greatest hope la that visitation become a timely and regular, without complications, stress, or trouble, Respondent Is recalcitrant, She Is hsbltually late, argumentative and careless, She conveys, by her actions and word., contempt for Orders of Court and for the relationship between my daughter and I that all the Orders Were meant to preserve. 2. The facta surrounding raspondent's delinquency are not In question, As shown In the Conciliator's report, respondant admits to baing late. The eXCusea offered In defenae are weak, The "traffic" excuse Is moat frequently used, but 2 relpondent has arrived much earlier than expected on a number of occallonl. She chose the arrival time, knowing full well what traffic conditions are likely to exllt. I have never encountered delays of more than 10 minute. when traveling the same route at the same time of day. It was clear from her demeanor In the two conferencel held by the Court's Custody Conciliator that she doel not believe adherence to the Order Is mandatory and she has promlaed more "problems." I will Introduce Into evidence an Ex Parte letter written by respondent to the Conciliator In which she Indicates the visitation probleml will continue. I will show that her failure to comply with the Order Is willful, thereby eltabUshlng a legal basis for a finding of Contempt, The only witness I will can la my wife, Stephanie Kallna.Metzger, who will testify about respondent'a failure to adhere to the visitation schedule and the provocative and careless tone of relpondent'l communlcatlonl. She will testify that the only communlcatlonl received from respondent alwaya Involve diminiShing my time with my daughter. I Intend to produce In evidence the letters I have written to respondent's attorney, which document my claims about respondent's delinquent behavior and her haraeslng communlcatlona. I will also Introduce Into evidence a recording from my anlwerlng machine that will allow the Court to hear the offhanded manner In which she deprlvel me of contact with my child. My adult daughter Mary Metzger II frequently her mother's deSignee to transport Michelle, eVen though mother Is available to carry out transportation. I will ahow, on cross'examlnatlon, respondent has damaged my relationship with my adult daughter by Involving her In visitation arrangements. Respondent and Mary have attempted to re.negotlate 3 the visitation schedule for 10 of the 12 visitation periods covered In my complaint. The purpose of bringing Michelle late Is to enable Mary to be the transportation designee or to accommodate Mary's college schedule and recreational plans, This has resulted In Michelle's late arrival and has drawn Mary Into the conflict. 3. I have been denied summer visitation (two three.week blocks) by reapondent. At thla hearing, I will ask that the honorable Court continue bl-weekly visitation (beyond the time when It would normally cease owing to the school summer vacation) and grant me a block of three weeks commencing 4 Auguat 2001. I have been denied the opportunity to plan for Michelle's care during the earty summer, or to plan a vacation with her, or to arrange for her to be engaged In any sort of enriching activity during an early summer period of custody. At this late date, Michelle would be beUer off at home because I have besn denied a chance to make any arrangements for Michelle's benefit. I further pray the Court require mother to transport Michelle at the beginning and end of all these vleltatlon perlode during the summer, since I dread the complicated negotlatlona that seem to be required at each exchange of custody. I request no modification of the current Order, but I respectfully request special relief In the matter of thle year'a summer schedule. WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Michael Metzger, respectfully reque.ta the Court find re.pondent In Contempt, and that the Court Impose a remedy designed to 4 OCT 2 0 ZlJoobl7 vs. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO, 95-6329 PATRICIA METZGER, Plalnllff/Respondent MICHAEL J, METZGER, DefendantlPelltloner CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 23 day of cQl!.tob e ~ ,2000, upon conslderallon of the attached Custody Conclllallon Summary Report, It Is hereby dlrecled and ordered as follows: 1, Legal Custo~. The parties, Patricia Melzger and Michael J, Metzger, shall have shared legal custody of the minor Child, Michelle Julie Metzger, born March 3, 1988, 2, Physical Custody, Mother shall have primary physical custody; Father shall have partial physical custody on alternallng weekends, Mother shall deliver the Chlid to Father by '3:00 PM on Friday evenings and Father shall return the Child home to Mother by 5:00 Sunday ,;venlng, If Monday Is a school holiday, the period shall extend to Monday evening at 5:00 PM, 3. Holidays, A. Thanksgiving. Father shall have Thanksgiving every year from 10:00 AM the day after Thanksgiving unlllthe Sunday following Thanksgiving at 5:00 PM, Mother shall have Michelle each Thanksgiving Day, B, ChrllitIllil.G, Father shall have the Child from December 25th at1 :30 PM until January 31s1 at 3:00 PM, Mother shall have Michelle each Christmas Eve and each Christmas morning, C, Summer Vacation, Falher shall have temporary physical custody during the summer vacation period each year for six weeks In two three-week conlinuous segmenls, The limes each year for these segments shall be set by the parties no later than June 1 sl. D, OIher Holidays, The parties shall quickly adjust this custody schedule so Michelle can observe the following holidays wllh her Mother: Rosh Hashanah (September), Yom Kippur (September or October), Hannukkah (November or December), pym (February or March), and Pesach {March "' Ap,lI- ,,,' "d ""nd d.,,}. t;;~ cJ No, 95-6329 4, Nellher party shall do or say anylhlng which may eslrange Ihe child from the olher parent, Injure Ihe opinion of the Child as to the olher parent, or hamper the free and natural development of the Child's love and respecl for the olher parent. Each parenl shall ensure that third parties also comply wllh this provision during his or her periods of custody, 5, Transoortatlon, The Falher, or his designee, shall transport Michelle at the end of each of his temporary cuslodlal periods and the Mother, or her designee, shall provide Ihe transportation at the conclusion of her period of cuslody, It shall be acceplable for Katie White to provide transportation In the event Ihal Molher Is nol able to do so, In IIghl of the physical distance between the parties, communlcallon may be necessary wllh regards to delays In travel times due to road and wealher conditions, Therefore, the parties are encouraged to make use of Father's cell phone number and voice mall In the evenllhal road or weather conditions will delay the expecled arrival or departure time, 6. RespondenUMother Is advised that this Court takes very seriously her responsibility In maintaining and providing transportation so that the Child may malnlaln a relationship with the Petitioner/Father. Therefore, additional occurrences of Mother's failure to deliver the Child to Father In a timely fashion for his custodial periods shall be referred to this Court by the Conciliator for a contempt hearing wherein Molher may be subject to a fine, proballon, or Imprisonment as provided at 23 Pa, C.S. ~ 4346, 7, Mother shall be required 10 appear In person for any subsequent hearing or pre- hearing conferences In the above-referenced mailer. BY THE COURT, /5/ ;;~J IJ. /l, g / Edgar Bayley, J. ~ i Dlsl: Mark C, Duffia, 301 Markel Slreet. po Box 109, Lemoyne, PA 17043,0109 Michael Metzger, Pro Se, 2000 Lewls Street, Herrlsburg. PA 17110 ~ TRIIF: COpy FROM RECORD In . ll.;"my whereof, I here unto sel my hand and the seal of sal (ourl .>>\~Ie, Pa, Thl ,....,2.J., f..~,..,....,~.,4f .... I , , ~.. Pfothonot..y , '. MICHAEL J, METZGER, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERlAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO, 95-6329 CIVIL ACTION. LAW CUSTODY PATRICIA METZGER, Plalnllff vs. 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 IIl1gallon Is as follows: NAME Michelle Julie Metzger DATE OF BIRTH March 3, 19BB CURRENTL V IN CUSTODY OF Mother 2, The parties were seen for their third Custody Conciliation Conference wilh the Conciliator on April 30, 2001, upon the filing of Father's petillon for contempt which was filed on March 2B, 2001. The last Order of Court was dated October 23, 2000. Present at the Conference were the Mother, Palrlcla Metzger, and Michael J, Metzger. Each party appeared pro S8, 3. The parties were seen previously on September 26. 2000 for a Conciliation Conference following Father having filed a Contempt Pellllon. Father had alleged that Mother had failed to follow the Order In a number of occurrences during the summer of 2000. Falher perceived this as an effort by Mother to minimize his contact with the Child, Mother participated In the Conclllallon Conference by telephone and was represented by counsel at the time, She agreed to a modlficallon of the Order which would then require her to provide the transportation on Friday evenings. This modification was made because Father's arrival to pick up the Child on Friday nights after work and a drive to pick up the child In Maryland would have him arriving In Harrisburg with the Child very late on Friday nights of his custodial weekend, It was hoped that by allowing MOlher to provide the transportallon on Friday nights the Child would arrive earlier for her custodial weekends wllh Father and Iherefore allowing longer visits and a more reasonable bedllme. 4, Father's present pellllon alleges there have been numerous limes subsequent 10 the change In Order when Mother has been late In producing the Child on Friday nights, On at least two occasions he alleges that she has been late by more than thirteen hours, Father claims to have sent correspondence to bolh Mother and to her prior counsel regarding her repealed lateness In producing the Child for his custodial visits, He alleges that he received no response to the lellers, ~y~@ . .. No. 95-6329 Additionally, Father complains that he can hear Molher In the background when he calls the Child on the telephone, that the Child has been Involved In the parties' dlspule with regard to her schedule, that Mother yells and curses at Father on the phone at times when the Child may be present, that Mother falls to share Information with regard to the Child's progress In school, that Mother frequently expects Father 10 change Ihe schedule to accommodate her holidays, that Mother's failure to produce the Child Is harmful to his relationship with his Daughter. Father would like Mother to follow the schedule as It Is presently arranged and keep the Child from getllng upset about the schedule, 5, Mother stated that she did not know why the Order was changed to require her to provide Friday night pickups despite the fact that she agreed to this at the previous Custody Conciliation Conference. She claims that the reason she Is frequently late Is because of heavy traffic getting out of the busy area of Maryland where she resides and to Father's home by 8:00 p.m. Mother also acknowledges there was one occasion when she was sick and did not feel like driving to bring the Child to Father. Therefore, she waited until Saturday of Father's custodial weekend to bring the Child. On a second occasion, the traffic was so bad that she decided to walt and come up Saturday morning. She additionally reports that the Child has been crying because the parties will not communicate with each other, that Father does not anSWer her telephone calls and does not return calls after she has left a message, She would like to have the previous Order of Court when Judge Bayley required that Father provide all transportation on Friday evenings. 6. The Conciliator worked extensively with these very angry parents In an attempt to mediate a resolution to their conflict around transportation, the holiday schedule and the summer schedule, Ultimately, despite some apparent progress with regard to the summer schedule and some discussions about alternatives for mid-point meeting places for custodial exchanges, Mother subsequently refused to make any concessions and wishes to retum to Judge Bayley's prior Order. Mother also staled her desire for the Court to order an evaluation of Father. 7, Father refused to withdraw his Contempt Petition and Insists that Mother either follow the present Order or agrees to a halfway meeting point for the weekend custodial exchanges, Therefore, It Is necessary for the parties to have a hearing before Judge Bayley. A hearing In this matter will take approximately one hour, 6JtlIJ I Date Mellss Peel Greevy, Custody Conciliator ~ .......,....... ,. '- .' . JlJN 11 200. fP Patricia Metzger Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO, 95-6329 CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY VI, Michael J. Metzger, Defendant ~flANDU~f Patrlcla,Metzaer. PI,lntl!! 1, Plaintiff's position on Issues raised by defendant Is that no willful Intent to deprive the father of custodial visitation has been made. 2. The following are the circumstances surrounding the visitation late dates: Oct 6, 2000: This was either the first or one of the first visitations after the schedule change, The traffic was heavy, Nov 17, 2000: Heavy traffic Jan 12,2001: I was very sick and was afraid of failing asleep In the car with my daughter, Feb 9, 2001: Heavy traffic and heavy workday. Feb 23, 2001: Major accident on Interstate 270 (road leading out of DC) 3, In reference to the Defendant's Issues as stated In paragraph 3: A) The letters were not Ignored, The letters are extremely hurtful and full of hate. This Is no way to communicate. C) The order of the court dated 10/23/2000, does not preclude Mary Metzger, the Defendant's dauahter from transporting her sister to her father's home, D) Each of the late Incldenls was due to traffic, bad weather or sickness, 4. The May, 2000 custody order stated that the defendant, Mike Metzger, was to pick up his daughler on Friday evenings alter school. The order further stated that the father may "change any Friday pick up to Saturday morning at 9:30 am by giving the mother alleast one week advance notice." 5. Mr. Metzger has never picked up his daughter on a Friday evening to take advantage of the extra time with her and In September, 2000, Mike Metzger called Patricia Metzger stating he would never pick his daughter up on a Friday evening, 6, In October, 2000, a contempt of court hearing was held because a Thursday evening visitation (July, 2000) was missed. I was on vacation wllh my daughters and after multiple attempts to contact Mike Metzger, could not reach him by phone. This Is a repeating pattern on Mr. Metzger's part to make It appear as If I do not communicate, Melissa Greevy of Cumberland County conducted the October 2000 hearing. After I explained thai Mr, Metzger refused to pick up his daughter on Friday evenings, Ms, Greevy suggested that I change Ihe visitation to have me bring Michelle on Friday evenings, I agreed, Ms, Greevy stated that If there were problems with this arrangement, to notify her and she would change It. It only took one Friday night ride In Washington DC traffic, to realize that this was nol going to work, It Is much easier going Into DC on a Friday evening than to go out of DC. I would have to leave work at 2:30pm every other Friday to make sure I arrived In Harrisburg by 8:00pm. And often this Is simply not possible. In addition, I am a trainer and often cannot leave my classes early. I wrote 2 lelters In October to Ms, Greevy stating the problems with the new arrangement, I received no answer 10 either letter, I called Mike Metzger on November 11, 2000 and lold him of the traffic problem. He stated that It was too bad and I would have to continue the schedule anyway, Again, this was to be a trial basis to allow visitation beginning Friday and ending Sunday. This type of visitation schedule Is not working effectively for the Plaintiff and Plaintiff wishes to return to the original schedule, 4. Before the schedule was changed there were absolutely no problems with pick up or delivery of my daughter. I am also not sure why Ms. Greevy suggested this as a solution, The solution needed was better communication belween Mr, Metzger and myself, 5, Mr. Melzger has told me (December, 20, 2001) that there will never be a need to communicate with him, When I try, I am hanged up on, yelled at or sent a fax at work that Is very embarrassing, When I do call to state Ihat I will be late due to traffic or weather the phone Is picked up and I can hear Mr, Metzger talking In the background with his wife, After 5 minutes or so, they hang up. When they decide not to pick up the cell phone, the message Is his wife's. Mr. Metzger specifically told Ms, Greevy that the cell phone was his alone and I would have no problem contacting him on It. 6, Communication Is a major issue, When I call his house, If his wife answers, she will not take a message for him, Bolh children have told me that their father stated that he would never communicate with me. Plaintiff made every reasonable effort to notify the Defendant If either she or her designee were going to be late. A visitation log supporting this will be submitted at the hearing. In addition, the Plalntlflls not sure why the October 2000 Custody order does not allow the decision to deliver our daughter on a Saturday morning, while the May 2000 order allowed for this? List of Witnesses: a,) Defendant b,) Mary Metzger Summarv of testlmonv: Patricia Metzger (Defendant) The change of visitation schedule Is not working out. I had been led to believe It was to be on a tnal basis yet subsequently found out that I could not change It. When I agreed to Ihe change I was very weary of It but felt a small amount of pressure during the mediation to agree to try It. It is my own fault that I agreed to It and did not want to make the same mistake In the second mediation, I am stili unsure why Mr. Metzger would not agree to go back to the onglnal schedule dunng the second mediation hearing, Even when things work smoothly, my daughter and I are In the car 3-4 hours every other Friday night. The trip to Harrisburg should only be 1 1/2 . 2 hours, She gets very upset during the ride, worrying that we'll be late, but I can't help the traffic, We can barely get dinner down our throats before we have to leave and sometimes we don't even have time to stop at a restaurant. I don't know how many ways to say this: Friday nights going out of DC are not working out. Summarv of Marv Metzaer: On several occasions, I, Mary Metzger have transported my sister, Michelle Metzger to visitation with our father, In Pennsylvania, I do this as a favor for my mOlher, to visit wllh my father for a IIl11e and to visit my friends from Pennsylvania. At no time was I ever forced to take my sister there, I either offered, or was asked to by my mom, because she Is tired, or has to work late, or Just because It Is convenient for the bolh of us, I used to take my sisler on some weekends while home from college, and now that I'm home for the summer, I am available to drive her whenever needed, or asked of me, Now when I go It Is to visit my friends and spend some time talking with my sister, In conclusion, I am Willing and able to take my sisler to visitation, at any time, ceo l-\'l 1'",,,' Htlz 'y'r')\-Aln,l,,,+ " ) , ")\Fl I ,....\'., ,"-'" .._~\.l.....l ~.':..- ""8"""11 ,.,\, '110\1111, 1i1' CI. t ,'-C I n, \ "- PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSVLVANIA : NO. 8508328 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION. LAW : IN CUSTODY v. MICHAEL J. METZGER Defendant Order of Court AND NOW, this day of , 2001, upon agreement of the parties, It Is hereby directed and ordered as follows, 1, ~ The parties, Palrlcla Metzger and Michael J, Metzger, shall have shared legal cuslody of the minor Child, Michelle Julia Metzger, born March 3, 1988. 2, ftlV81~J CU8t~ Mother shall have primary phYSical custody; Father shall have partial custody on alternating weekends during the school year, Father shall pickup the Child at 9:30 AM, on Salurday mornings and Mother shall pickup the Child at 7:00 P.M, on Sunday evenings, If Monday Is a school holiday, the period shall extend to Monday evening at 7:00 P,M, 3, .I:I21I9r'a. A, ~ Father shall have Michelle at Thanksgiving every year from 10:00 A,M, the day after Thanksgiving until the Sunday following Thanksgiving at 7:00 P,M, Mother shall have Michelle each Thanksgiving Day, B, kbrlstmas, Father shall have Michelle from December 24th at 4 P.M, until December 31lt at6 P,M. each year, I C, Summer Vecatlon, Father shall have temporary physical custody during l the summer vacation period each year for six weeks in two three-week continuous segments, The firstlhree-week segmenl shall begin at 0, NO, 95-6329 -z.Y\~ S 12:00 noon on the first Saturday occurring after the last day of school and shall end at 12:00 noon Saturday three weeks later, The second three- week segment shall begin on the first Saturday in August at 12:00 noon and shall end at 12:00 noon Saturday three weeks later, ) E, ~ If the following Jewish Holidays fall on Father's altematlng weekend period of custody, Michelle shall remain in Mother's custody: the first day of Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, the first or last day of Hanukkah, the first or second day of Pesach, 4. TransDOrtlltl2l1 Father shall pick up Michelle at her residence at the beginning of each of his periOdS of temporary custody and Mother shall pick up Michelle at Father's realdence when her custody resumes, BY THE COURT: Date of Order: JUDGE (') C' "'1 c:. , .,.. ~ . 'T"j'. I. 0,1.' ._~: '''l' Vj " Pi'. " ~. ."U ~cJ .. " ~~() - .' , c. .. ,'; .~ ::1 ," "'" ~.t ... .r.- -'... . ~ ,. /,Jill' (J 8 2001 ~ "'". '* PATRICIA METZGER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO, 95-6329 Plaintiff vs, MICHAEL J. METZGER, CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY Defendant CUSTODY CONCILIATION SUMMARY REPORT 1 'I , 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 Michelle Julie Metzger DATE OF BIRTH CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF March 3, 1988 Mother 2, The parties were seen for their third Custody Conciliation Conference with the Conciliator on April 30, 2001, upon the filing of Father's petition for contempt which was filed on March 28, 2001, The last Order of Court was dated October 23, 2000. Present at the Conference were the Mother, Patricia Metzger, and Michael J, Metzger, Each party appeared pro sa, 3. The parties were seen previously on September 26, 2000 for a Conciliation Conference following Father having filed a Contempt Petition, Father had alleged that Mother had failed to follow the Order In a number of occurrences during the summer of 2000, Father perceived this as an effort by Mother to minimize his contact with the Child, Mother participated In the Conciliation Conference by telephone and was represented by counsel at the time, She agreed to a modification of the Order which would then require her to provide the transportation on Friday evenings, This modification was made because Father's arrival to pick up the Child on Friday nights after work and a drive to pick up the child In Maryland would have him arriving In Harrisburg with the Child very late on Friday nights of his custodial weekend, It was hoped Ihat by allowing Mother to prOVide the transportation on Friday nights the Child would arrive earlier for her custodial weekends with Father and therefore allowing longer visits and a more reasonable bedtime, 4, Father's present petition alleges there have been numerous times subsequent to the change In Order when Mother has been late In producing Ihe Child on Friday nights, On at least two occasions he alleges that she has been late by more than thirteen hours, Father claims to have sent correspondence to both Mother and to her prior counsel regarding her repeated lateness in producing the Child for his custodial visits. He alleges that he received no response to the lelters, .- . - No, 95-6329 Additionally, Father complains that he can hear Mother In the background when he calls the Child on the telephone, that the Child has been Involved In the parties' dispute with regard to her schedule, that Mother yells and curses at Father on the phone at times when the Child may be present, that Mother falls to share Information with regard to Ihe Child's progress In school, that Mother frequently expects Falher to change the schedule to accommodale her holidays, that Mother's failure to produce the Child is harmful to his relationship with his Daughter. Father would like Mother to follow the schedule as it Is presenlly arranged and keep the Child from getting upset about the schedule, 5, Mother stated that she did not know why the Order was changad to require her to provide Friday night pickups despite the fact that she agreed to this at the previous Custody Conciliation Conference, She claims that the reason she Is frequenlly late Is because of heavy traffic getting out of the busy area of Maryland where she resides and to Father's home by 8:00 p,m. Mother also acknowledges there was one occasion when she was sick and did not feel like driving to bring the Child to Father, Therefore, she waited until Saturday of Father's custodial weekend to bring the Child, On a second occasion, the traffic was so bad that she decided to walt and come up Saturday morning. She additionally reports that the Child has been crying because the parties will not communicate with each other, that Falher does not answer her telephone calls and does not return calls after she has left a message, She would like to have the previous Order of Court when Judge Bayley required that Father provide all transportation on Friday evenings, 6. The Conciliator worked extensively with these very angry parents In an attempt to mediate a resolution to their connlct around transportation, the holiday schedule and the summer schedule. Ultimately, despite some apparent progress with regard to the summer schedule and some discussions about alternatives for mid-point meeting places for custodial exchanges, Mother subsequently refused to make any concessions and wishes to return to Judge Bayley's prior Order, Mother also stated her desire for the Court to order an evaluation of Father, 7, Father refused to withdraw his Contempt Petition and Inslsls that Mother either follow the present Order or ayrees to a halfway meeting point for the weekend custodial exchanges. Therefore, It Is necessary for the parties to have a heating before Judge Bayley, A hearing In this matter will take approximately one hour, ~ G /~) I ) / (/ J !. /, 'I (i (<" ( Mellss~ Peel Greevy, Esquire; Custody Conciliator Date AUIJ :12* PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 95-6329 CIVIL TERM MICHAEL J, METZGER Defendant : CIVIL ACTION. LAW : IN CUSTODY Petition for a Finding of Contempt The petition of Michael J, Metzger respeclfully represents: 1, That on May 25, 2000, Judge Bayley entered an Order IN RE: CUSTODY granting Patricia Metzger permission to move the minor child Michelle J, Metzger to Maryland. This Order provides for a new vlsllatlon schedule effective May25, 2000, 2. Respondent has willfully failed to abide by the order In Ihat 1) Michael Metzger arrived al 5:45 P,M, on July 13, 2000 to pickup Michelle for visitation and no one was home, Mr. Metzger did see Ihe child until 10:30 A,M, on July 15"', No notice of the variation In schedule was provided and no explanation was given by respondenl regarding Ihe child's unavallablllly, As to lIem 1, Judge Bayley's Order specifies the vlsllatlon schedule of Ihe last Cuslody Order would remain In effecl until Respondent moves Ihe child Michelle 10 Maryland, Pe\illonl3r has been picking up Michelle at 5:45 every Thursday nlghl for 4 years, I would not pray for the court's Inlerventlon In Ihese matlers exceplthls Incldenl amplifies my fears Ihat problems such as Ihls will continue after Ihe move 10 Maryland, Petitioner Is also concerned aboutlhe Implications of this willful disobedience, on Respondent's part, of Ihe honorable court's cuslody order pertaining to the above named minor child occurring so soon after oblalnlng a favorable ruling from the court, Petitioner fears respondenl Is nol acting In the children's best Interesl according 10 the dlrecllon and Intenl of the honorabla court's Cuslody Order and that the substitute cuslody arrangement will not be carried out as ordered, I ~~~': '" f:; ':._" ('. 7- 1,.\ ~.~ ;:5 , -):1' j' I ~. w ):j .. .'- , .(n (" "I ::~ '. l. >' I , III] ,. t:.~ Ill.. ;11 ., l:'l ::l , LJ W . , .. . 95-6329 CIVIL TERM shall extend to Monday evening at 5:00 p,m. The father may change any Friday pick up to Saturday morning at 9:30 a,m. by giving the mother at least one week advance notice, (II) Every year at 10:00 a.m, the day after Thanksgiving until the folloWing Sunday evening at 5:00 p,m, The mother shall have Michelle each Thanksgiving Day. (III) Every December 25th at 1 :30 p,m, until January 1"1 at 3:00 p,m, The mother shall have Michelle each Christmas eve and Christmas morning. (b) The father shall have periods of temporary physical custody during the summer school vacation period each year for six weeks In two three- week continuous segments. The times each year for each of those segments shall be set by the parties not later than June 1 '1, (4) The parties shall equitably adjust this custody schedule so Michelle can observe the following holidays with her mother: Rosh Hashanah (September), Yom Kippur (September or October), Hanukkah (November or December), Purim (February or March), and Pesach (March or Aprll- first and second days), (5) The father, or his designee, shall pick up Michelle for each period of his temporary physical custody, and the mother, or her designee, shall pick up Michelle at the end of that period, 95-6329 CIVIL TERM $40,000 per year. The father is a computer systems specialist and maintenance technician for Lockheed Martin In Harrisburg where he has been employed four years and earns $47,000 per year, At separation the father saw Michelle and their older child Mary, now age 18 who was born September 22, 1981, extensively under a private arrangement. A custody order was entered for both girls on March 5, 1996, The order was amended on September 16, 1997, and amended again on January 6,2000, The father now sees Michelle on alternate Saturday mornings at 10:30 a.m, until Sunday at 6:00 p,m., and on each Thursday evening from 5:45 p.m, until 8:30 p,m, He has Michelle for seven consecutive days each summer, He has seven discretionary single days added to his regular and holldey periods of temporary physical custody, The holidays are Father's Day and periods at Thanksgiving and Christmas, Mary Is graduating from high school and will be attending college next fall at Frostburg, which Is a state school In western Maryland, The cost as an out-or-state student Is $14,000 per year, If the mother becomes a resident of Maryland that cost will be $8,500 a Year, Mary has been only a fair student. She wants to attend Frostburg and the mother was relieved when she was accepted, The father was not consulted about Mary attending Frostburg, He believes that It is best for Mary to attend a community college or a two-year campus of Penn State University prior to moving to another campus, He Is not going to pay any of the costs at Frostburg. He testified that he will provide Mary some expense money conditioned upon her being a successful -2- 95-6329 CIVIL TERM student. Michelle Is completing the sixth grade at the Good Hope School In the Cumberland Valley School District. She had a hard time getting along with other school children, a problem that has abated, She has been receiving language therapy to remedlate language/auditory processing difficulties, Currently a teacher reads examinations to her which makes them easier for her to complete, Michelle's condition has been Improving and the amount of special support provided to her at school has decreased substantially, She Is getting adequate grades. The mother works extensively with her at home and both parents have been actively Involved in her school activities, The mother Just obtained a master's degree In computer training, She wants to move with Michelle to Montgomery County, Maryland, In order to obtain a better paying Job In her field which will have more opportunities for advancement than are available with companies in central Pennsylvania. Montgomery County Is in the suburbs of Washington, D,C. Technology and Internet companies are expanding rapidly In the greater Washington area, The mother has already received an offer from CGI Graphics as a computer training manager for $55,000, That offer, which Is being held open, contains some stock options, The mother has also looked Into other employment opportunities and knows of a possible Job at the University of Maryland, The schoola and other facilities In Montgomery Counly are as good as those In this area, The mother wants to rent an apartment In either Chevy Chase or Kensington which Is about -3. 95-6329 CIVIL TERM a one hour and forty minute drive from Harrisburg, She currently pays $800 a month rent, To rent a similar apartment In Montgomery County will cost $1,100 to $1,400 a month, The mother does not leave Michelle alone for any extended time. A sister In Montgomery County, who Is a housewife, Is willing to look after Michelle when needed which will relieve the mother of the expense ahe now has when someone watches her, The mother belieVes that she will still be better off with an Increase In salary despite an Increase In living expenses when coupled with greater opportunity for advancement, a decrease In the costs for Mary's college education which she Intends to pay, and the added support of her family, The father believes there are many good Jobs In the expanding computer Industry In this area and that the mother's primary purpose In wanting to mOVe to Montgomery County Is to be closer to her family, He acknowledges that the mother Is a loving caring parent who Is even closer to Michelle than himself, He Is upset that the mother has not always gotten the children to him as required by the court orders, He testified that the mother makes last minute changes and then does not notify him. The mother testified that the father Is dlfflcull to contact by phone and she often Is unable to get him when there are changea, She testified that there have been some difficulties In conjunction with the activities of the children that have conflicted with the father's schedule, She acknowledged that she Is not as punctual aa the father, The father testified that he has tried to cooperate when the children have had events that connlcted with the custody schedules, The difficulties regarding Mary reached a point -4- 95-6329 CIVIL TERM In July, 1999, when Mary wa3 working at a part-time Job, that the father agreed that Mary would not have tll follow the custody schedule and that they would work out times that would be convenient for them to be together, He testified that he has stayed In contact with Mary and sees and talks to her enough that their relationship has strengthened. The father testified that Michelle eagerly awaits her periods of temporary physical custody with him, that they have a warm loving relationship, and that they have wonderful times together, The father'e mother lives In Levlltown, a suburb of Philadelphia, and he and Michelle often visit her, Michelle has a good relationship with the father's wife, The father believes that It Is not In the best Interest of Michelle to move to Montgomery County, He believes that she should not be put Into a new school district as her difficulties In schoolwork have been Improving In the Cumberland Valley School District. He believes that the history of difficulties that he haa experienced with regard to exerCising his periods of temporary phYSical custody with the children will be exacerbated If the mother mOVes to Maryland, The mother testified that the father loves Michelle and provides her good care. She has wanted the father to expand his alternate weekenda to start on Friday rather than Saturday morning but for some reason the father has resisted, She feels that to mOVe Michelle now at age twelve will not be difficult for her as It would be If she Were older and In high school, If she mOVes to Montgomery County, Maryland, with Michelle she Is agreeable to help the father with transportation for his periods of temporary -5. 95-6329 CIVIL TERM physical custody. She suggests eliminating the Thursday evenings, expanding his altemate weekends from Friday evening through Sunday evening, expanding the holiday schedule and adding several weuks during the summer, We talked to Michelle In chambers, She Is a delightful young girl whose maturity is consistent with her chronological age, She loves both of her parents deeply, She said that her father's neW wife Is a good friend, She Is aware of her mother's desire to move and If It takea place she wants to continue to See her father on a regular basis, In Gruber v. Gruber, 400 Pa, Super, 174 (1990), the Superior Court of Pennsylvania set forth three factors to consider In determining whether a custodial parent should be permitted to relocate children to another state outside the geographical area of the non-custodial parent: 1, the potential advantages of the proposed move and the likelihood that the move would substantially Improve the quality of life for the custodial parent and the children and Is not the result of a momentary whim on the part of the custodial parent; 2, the Integrity of the motives of both the custodial and non-custodial parent In either seeking the mOVe or seeking to prevent it; 3, the availability of realistic, substitute visitation arrangements which will adequately foster an ongoing relationship between the child and the non-custodial parent. In B..... v. B....., 710 A,2d 1206 (Pa, Super. 199B), the Court stated that It has consistently held that Grub.r "refines upon, but does not alter Ihe basic and determinative Inquiry as to the direction In which the best Interests of the child lie," As to the first Grub.r faclor, the Superior Court stated In And....on v. McVay, 743 A,2d 472 (Pa, Super, 1999): -6- 95-6329 CIVIL TERM A court need not consider only economic benefits when determining whether relocation substantially Improves the quality of life of the parent, . " Rather, 'when the move will significantly Improve the general quality of life for the custodial parent, Indirect benefits flow to the children with whom they reside.' This Is because 'the best Interests of the child are more closely aligned with the Interest and quality of life of the custodial parent. , . .' [T]here Is no need, , , to show an Independent tJenefil, apart from that of [the moving party], flowing to the children because of the relocation. See Zalenko v. White, 701 A,2d 227, 229 (Pa. Super, 1997). (Other citations omitted,) The credible evidence supports the mother that the potential advantages of a move to Montgomery County, Maryland, create a likelihood of substantial improvement to her quality of life, and that of Michelle, and that It Is not a result of a momentary whim on her part, The move will Immediately provide her substantially Increased earnings, With the competitive job market In the Washington area It will also provide her with greater opportunity for advancement that Is complemented by her having just earned her master's degree In computer training, Increased financial benefits are particularly Important to the mother In light of the father's unwillingness, eVen with an Income that Is larger than hers, to pay any of the direct cost of Mary's undergraduate education at Frostburg, Furthermore, the mother's residency In Maryland will substantially reduce the costs for Mary to attend Frostburg, Living In the area where her family lives also Is an advantage that wlillmprove the quality of life for the molher and Michelle, The father has remarried while the mother 10 single and now remains Isolated from dally contact with her supportive family, The molher started looking for a job this spring, an endeavor which has proved fruitful. If she accepts a job other than the one at CGI Graphics It .7. 95-6329 CIVIL TERM obviously will be a position that she feels Is better than thai one, These factora satisfy us that the Integrity of the mother's motives are sound In seeking permission to move Michelle to Montgomery County, Maryland, That Is not to say that we do not feel that the motives of the father In seeking to prevent the move are not honestly felt. He has a close lOVing relationship with Michelle which Is recognized by the mother, It will not be as easy for him to see her as It Is now although we are satisfied that there are available realistic, substituted visitation arrangements which will adequately foster his ongoing relationship with his daughter, The mother recognizes that she will have to comply with those arrangements that we set In this order. Overall, based on all of the evidence, we find that It Is In the best Interest of Michelle to allow her mother to move her to Montgomery County, Maryland. ORDEf{ OF COURT AND NOW, this '2~ day of May, 2000, IT IS ORDERED: (1) The petition of Patricia Metzger to move Michelle Julie Metzger to Montgomery County, Maryland, IS GRANTED. (2) Until the move takes place the current custody order for Michelle shall remain In effect except that the father's time with her during the summer school vacation period of 2000 is expanded to six weeks In two three-week continuous segments, The times for each of those segments shall be set by the parties; otherwise, this Judge shall be notified by each party In writing by June 5, 2000, as to the weeks sought by that party, with reasons, at which time the court will set the two three-week -B- 96-6329 CIVIL TERM continuous segments, (3) When Michelle moves to Montgomery County, Maryland: (a) The father shall have periods of temporary physical custody during each school year as follows: (I) Every other weekend from after school on Friday until Sunday evening at 5:00 p.m, If a Monday Is a school holiday the period shall extend to Monday evening at 5:00 p.m, The father may change any Friday pick up to Saturday morning at 9:30 a,m, by giving the mother at least one week advance notice. (II) Every year at 10:00 a.m, the day after Thanksgiving until the following Sunday evening at 5:00 p,m, The mother shall have Michelle each Thanksgiving Day. (ill) Every December 25th at 1:30 p.m, until January 1"at 3:00 p,m, The mother shall have Michelle each Christmas eve and Christmas morning. (b) The father shall have periods of temporary physical custody during the summer school vacation period each year for she weeks In two three- week continuous segments, The times each year for each of those segments shall be set by the parties not later than June 1 ", (4) The parties shall equitably adjust this custody schedule so Michelle can observe the following holidays with her mother: Rosh Hashanah (September), Yom -9- PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintifl' vs, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION - LA W IN TIlE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO, 95-6329 CIVIL TERM MICHAEL j, METZGER, Defendant ORm:\ AND NOW, this -z.-b day of ~ ~, 21101l, upon receipt of the Conciliator's Report, it appearing that the parties have reached IIn agreement as to a modification of the existing Order, which Was dictated in their presence and approved by them, it is hereby ordcred and directed as follows: I. The Order of Sept em her 16,1997, is modified such that Father shall pick up the minor child, Michelle Metzger, d,o,b. March 3, 1988, on his alternating weekends at 10:30 a,m, on Saturday morning at Mother's residence, and Mother shall then pick up the child Sunday evcning at 6:01l p,m, at Father's residence, Mother is specifically instructed to Illllke slIre that the child j,: relldy and nVllilnble to he picked up hy Fllther lit 10:30 lI,m. 2, All other tenns IInd conditions or the Order of Septemher 16, 1997, shall remain in full fllrce IInd ellcct. \ ~"''""'''' 3. 11l1s Order resolves the eontempllssues tiled by Father herein. Patricia Metzger, pro se 1528 Tussey Court Mechanlcsburg, PA 17055 BY THE COURT, ~Jl.OO RI<3 Michael J. Metzger, pro se 200 Lewis Street Harrisburg, P A 17110 mlb >.! (f j I' I ;1 . 1'). I t} ll~ .~. ~;.~, .. I ~ f\ '.11",.:. /~" . !iiI......:.: _ t" " : ~ ".- : ,-, ~ . . ,>-'~'L . ~ , NARD 4 1900 d- o- . PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 95-6329 CIVIL TERM MICHAEL J. METZGER Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY ClIDIlR OF <XXIRT AND toi, this S' upon consideration of the attached ordered and directed as follows: day of ;o,a..~ , 1996, Custody Conciliation Report, it is 1. The Mother, Patricia Metzger, and the Father, Michael J. Metzger, shall have shared legal custody of Mary Metzger, born September 22, 1981, and Michelle Metzger, born March 3, 1988. 2. The Mother shall have primary physical custody of the Children. 3. The Father shall have partial physical custody of the Children on alternating weekends from Saturday at 10:00 a.m. until Sunday at 6:00 p.m., beginning March 9, 1996. In addition, the Father shall have partial custody of the Children every Thursday evening from 5:00 p.m. until 8;00 p.m. During the sWlll1er vacation each year, the Father shall have custody of the Children for seven consecutive days upon providing sixty days prior notice to the Mother. On two occasions each year, and upon providing thirty days prior notice to the Mother, the Father shall have custody of the Children for extended weekends from Friday evening at 6;00 p.m. until the following Sunday evening at 6;00 p.m. for purposes of taking the Children to visit the Father's parents in Bucks County. The extended weekends shall coincide with the Father's regular weekend custody schedule. 4. The parties shall share custody of the Children on holidays as follows: A. Thanksgiving - In even numbered years, the Father shall have custody of the Children from the Wednesday before 'l'hanksgiving after school recesses through the following Sunday at 2;00 p.m. The Mother shall have custody of the Children during the same period in odd numbered years. B. Christmas - In every year, the Mother shall have custody of the Children from the beginning of the school Christmas vacation through Christmas Day at 2:00 p.m. In every year, the Father shall have custody of the Children from Christmas Day at 2:00 p.m. through January 1 at 4:00 p.m. C. Father's Day/t10ther's Day - In every year, the Father shall have custody of the Children on Father's Day weekend from Saturday at 10:00 a.m. through Sunday at 6:00 p.m. In every year, the Mother shall have custody of the Children on Mother's Day weekend from Saturday at 10;00 a.m. through Sunday at 6:00 p.m. PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 95-6329 CIVIL TERM . . MICHAEL J. METZGER Defendant : CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN CUSTODY ammY lXIiCILIATI~ 5lIIlARY RBl'(Rl' IN AQXIUlANCB wrm aJIBI!RLAII) aumr RllLB OF CIVIL PIO"".IRB 1915.3-8, the undersigned Custody Conciliator submits the following report: 1. The relevant information pertaining to the Children who are the subjects of this litigation is as follows: NAME Mary Metzger Michelle Metzger BIRTH DATE CURRENTLY IN CUSTODY OF September 22, 1981 March 3, 1988 Plaintiff/Mother Plaintiff/Mother 2. An initial Conciliation Conference was scheduled for December 12, 1995 at which both the Father and his counsel were present. Although the Mother and her counsel did not attend the first Conference apparently due to a scheduling oversight, the Father's counsel indicated the parties were planning to have a four-way conference and asked the Conciliator to retain jurisdiction. A second Conciliation Conference was held on February 28, 1996, with the following individuals in attendance: The Mother, patricia Metzger, with her counsel, Edward J. Weintraub, Esquire, and the Father, Michael J. Metzger, with hia counsel, Susan Candiello, Esquire. 3. The parties agreed to the entry of an order in the form as attached. Date ~ ..,..~ ..2 't, I '1iJ II >>,~ 111'=9 o Dawn S. sunday (f Custody Conciliator - v. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 95-8329 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION. LAW : IN CUSTODY PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff MICHAEL J. METZGER Defendant An.wer to Petition for Perml.,lon to Reloca. I, Michael Metzger, wish to respond polnt-by-polntto the Petition for Permission to Relocate submitted March 10, 2000 by Patricia Metzger, Petitioner. Hearing date Is set for May 17,2000. 1. Admitted. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Admitted. 5. Admitted. 6. Denied. By way of further explanallon, It is true that Mary, who Is 18 and has a bUIY wort< and social schedule, does not attend scheduled visitation. Instead, she vlllts me when we are mutually able to meet and she usually accommodates me when special family events are planned and I prOVide sufficient advance notice for her to aHer her wort< schedule. I am In frequent contact with her by phone. This arrangement is most appropriate for Mary. 7. Denied. By way of further explanation, we have been separated since June 1005 and I have exercised vacation time every year except 1096. I started a new Job in the summer of 1096 and had no vacation time accrued. I sometimes share my vacation time with my mother In Levittown, PA because Petitioner does not afford her time with the children. 8. Admitted. Request permission to relocate be denied. O. Admitted In part, denied In part. By way of further explanation, Petitioner's family lives In the Washington D.C. metropolitan area. Her family consists of her mother and 3 sisters, all of whom have busy lives of their own. None of them Is available to prOVide care for Michelle, so the "support system" referred to In the petition is probably In reference to personal emotional support and financial support, since Petitioner's mother Is wealthy. 10. Denied. By way of further explanation, life In the Washington D.C. metropolitan area Is not better than here In Central Pennsylvania. Chevy Chase, MD directly bordel1l on Washington D.C., which Is widely known as a high crime area and the "murder capitol' of the United States. Additionally, widely available research reveals that cost of living In Central PA Is only 73% of 1he national average while the cost of living In Chevy Chase Is 58% higher than the national average. A $50,000 salary In Chevy Chase Is equivalent to a salary of $23101 here. Average home costin Chevy Chase Is more than double that of an equivalent property in Harrisburg. My children cannot possibly enjoy a better standard of living and a beller lifestyle In Chevy Chase, MD unlen Pe1itloner Is able to Immediately double her Income and Is able to protect them from crime and harmfullnnuences In the urban environment. 11. Admitted In part, denied In part. By way of further explanation, point-to-polnt Is approximately 2 hours during times of minimal traffic. The Washington D.C. Beltway and the Route 270 super highway leading to It are clogged with traffic even during off- peak times. 12. Denied. By way of further explana110n, Petitioner does not now cooperate with Father or fulflllthe terms of the current Agreed Custody Order. The current Custody Order dated September 9, 1997, as modified January 26,2000 are attached as exhibits A and B In the petition dated March 10. My last two Petitions for Contempt of Court will be presented as evidence at the hearing. These documents will show Petitioner makes little effort to follow either the spirit or letter of the Agreed Custody Order. 13. Admitted in part, denied In part. By way of further explanation, Michelle seems to have occasional fits of depression. To my knowledge, Michelle is not currently in counseling and does not take medication. However, Michelle's emotional wellbeing cannot be Improved by removing her from close proximity to me, her father, and reducing the frequency of contact we enjoy. This relocation will also eliminate the occasional contacts we have outside the parameters of the visitation schedule. Michelle's learning disability Is mild and III defined. A document signed by Petitioner agreeing to a minimal level of learning support for Michelle at the Good Hope Middle School will be presented as evidence at the hearing. This document will show Petitioner Is not relocating in order to obtain better learning support for Michelle. The Cumberland Valley School District has extensive resources for assisting students with a wide range of learning problems. 104a. Admitted. 104b. Denied. By way of further explanation, Petitioner travels to Chevy Chase a minimum of ten times a year to attend social events (often leaVing Ihe older child, Mary, behind), so that it will not be necessary for her to relocate to enjoy social events. She attends most of them now. Further, there is an abundance of cultural events here, as well as museums, vast libraries, and hundreds of sites of historical Interest. Allhough we have nothing to compare with the National Arts Center or Smithsonian, it isn't necessary to live in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area to enjoy these cullural resources. 104c. Denied. By way of further explanation, see ill13 above. Also, Michelle has received personal attention and one-on-one learning support throughout her school career In the outstanding CV schools. 104d. Admitted In part, denied In part. By way of further explanation, allhough Monlgomery county schools may provide excellent extra-currlcular activities, Michelle will not be able to participate In activities Which occur during weekends if the petition is granted. Michelle will be traveling to Pennsylvania Instead of playing soccer or basketball, as she loves to do. 104e. Denied. Chevy Chase\Montgomery county schools, like most public schools, are not predominantly Jewish. 104f. Admitted In part, denied In part. By way of further explanation, Petitioner has been looking for work In the Washington D.C. area for over six months and has received few offers. The offer referred to In the petition represents less than a 20% Increase In her current salary, which Is Insufficient to afford her and the children a comparable financial standard of living. Petitioner has not received a financially viable J , Job offer. Further, on March 18, 2000, Central PA was recognized as the number five growth area for technology related careers In the entire nation. 15. Denied. By way of further explanation, I enjoy a close and loving relationship with my children which will be degraded significantly If they are relocated to Maryland. I have tried, since the separation and divorce, to live and WIlI1< within a ten mile radius of their residence and schools so that I am both emotionally and physically available to them. My relallonshlp with Mary Is changing this June anyway, because she will have attained maJority, but my younger daughter, Michelle, will be devastated. Michelle does nol wish to move. We are accuslomed to seeing each other every week. It will no longer be feasible for me to attend her musical performances and sport events. The separation will make It much more difficult for me to provide strong and Immediate fatherly guidance and discipline as I was able to do with Mary. Michelle may enjoy cloaer contact with her cousins In Maryland, but this Is a poor trade-off compared to cloae and frequent contact with me, her father. WHEREFORE, Respondent, Michael Metzger, respectfully submits this Answer to the petition of Patricia Metzger for permission to relocate and prays the honorable Court deny permission to relocate based on the facts of this matter: Petitioner has not made provisions for, nor will she attain within a reasonable time frame, a better .tandard of living for the children; Petitioner has made a number of mlsreprell8ntations In her petition In order to convince the court to permit her move: the move, if permitted, will degrade the quality of Father's relationship with his children and quantity of vi.itatlon will decrease significantly: Mother has shown little wllllngneaa to follow the current Cu.tady Order and Father has no reason to believe her relocation will cause her to be more scrupulous. Respectfully Submitted, ~p;r;yr Michael J. Metzger 200 Lewis Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 233-2426 Pro se Respondent .1 i . oj .j:.i.'f '. }. , \..1 .. I" ,..,' " ','\ \, .1~.. '1" t. i ~ Ln r:: N "', l'J8 .. ::1..-: - f ) ..; :w:: 1..-'.'1 It!Y ~ :.1. c.. "1;;J il" ,~ .- ~~fi t.n ~5~~ I ; fjiti o.-HI >- 'f!;: ..C ,00- :a: -,. LI_ 0 :J u c;, U , ~ 2. As directed by Ihe Court. the Plalnllff will propose Ihe following resolullon In this mailer: The Plaintiff Is proposing 10 relocale for both her children's benefil and her benefil as well. The parties have a daughter, Mary Chartres Metzger, not a subject of Ihls action, who Is enrolling at Froslburg Slale University In Maryland and Ihe Plalnllff will be paying for Ihls child's college education In full. In order to do so she would like to relocale 10 take advanlage of Ihe In-slale tulllon as well as Ihe Increased salary and Ihe markel opportunllles for advancemenlln the technology corridor In Marylandl and northem Virginia. The Plalnllff does not wish to do anylhlng al all to compromise Iha relallonshlp between the minor child and her falher, the Defendant. Therefore, as a proposed resolution In Ihls maller, Plaintiff Is willing to offer addlllonalllme on the weekends to Ihe father. conllnue Ihe weekday vis lis and provide the Defendant extended unlnlerrupted vlslls of cuslody In Ihe summertime as well as on school holidays. In fact, Plaintiff would like to see Defendanl's lime wllh Ihe minor child Increased. Plaintiff would also we willing to assume seventy-five (75%) percent of the transportallon responsibility. Plalnllff would propose that the Court simply structure on Order on record Increasing Ihe Defendant's time with Ihe child. setting forth some transportallon responslbllllles Ihereby allowing Ihe Plalnllff to relocate, Ihereby realizing a significant Increase In Income and permitting her to pay for Ihe parties' oldest daughter's college education. Respectfully submllled, WEIDNER :134372 ;.,-, '.1 ~ ('I ~ - .' 'dP .. ~5 ~-:: ~ U"., f~ :lC \~1 ~-:': . r' u.. C'I-'l ) .-. ....::.. to. 0 .: '(1) )' f~!~ - \ >- 1:llli r,: . of 1;,JLl.. "'.. :.: LJ. C> .:~ 1 U L.' Ll L,'.; ,'~ ",," '\/.\1 LJQ rr:?'1 ill :1: ?G Cu' ",/' " . ,.' \' .; I\'TJ ,.,.,..I..J. ._J ._~......1 1 F~i':N3'il.VN~lJ\ change in the schedule to make sure that Father is given a similar amount of time that he has under the current order. 6. The Defendant's position on custody is as tiJllows: Futher docs not believe the relocation is in the best interests of the children. He notes that he docs not have any contact at all with the oldest child. He also notes that the purties huve been in conciliation on u number of ocensions wherein he suggested that Mother was in contempt and that Mother has manipulated the schedules to his detriment. He is concerned that if Mother is able to move the children to Maryland, that she will again manipulate the schedule so as to ensure that his time with his youngest daughter will be lessened and eventually disappear just as it did with the older child. 7. Need for separate counsel to represent child(ren): Neither party requested. 8. Need for independent psychological evaluation or counseling: None requested and the Conciliator docs not believe any is necessary. 9. A hearing in this matter will take one-half day. 10. Other matters or comments: The parties have appeared in front of this Conciliator on a number of occasions, most recently on u contempt petitionlilcd by Father as a result of a disruption of his custodial schedule. Father has no contact with his oldest daughter and each parent blames the other for that occurring. Futher is concerned that if the younger child moves away, that the same thing will occur. The Conciliator explained to Mother thut she has the burden of proof in this cuse. The Conciliator also indicated to the Father, however, that since he has u thirly limited custodiul arrungement (ulternating weekends Ihlln Suturduy until Sunday and one evening per week), and the fact that Molller wants to move only to Chevy Chase, Murylund. that should the Mother PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 95-6329 MICHAEL METZGER, Defendant CIVIL ACTION IN CUSTODY LAW RULE TO SHOW CAUSE AND NOW, this day of , 2000, a RULE is issued upon the Defendant, Michael Metzger, to show cause why the within Petition for Permission to Relocate should not be granted. Said Rule returnable at hearing on the day of , 2000 at m. o'clock, in Courtroom No. BY THE COURT I Judge 2 MEYER&, OElFOR. UllZQIVER . IOYlE 01'0 'WAil. SECOND 61nEf.T , PO DOx 100; . HARRI68U~G ~A 1110R (7111236 Voila . FAX (711) 13(1'i817 PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. NO. 95-6329 MICHAEL METZGER, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN CUSTODY PETITION FOR PERMISSION TO RELOCATE 1. Petitioner is patricia Metzger, Plaintiff in the above- captioned action, (hereinafter "Mother"). 2. Respondent is Michael Metzger, Defendant in the above- captioned action, (hereinafter "Father") . 3. The parties were married on June 6, 1981 and separated on June 10, 1995. They were divorced pursuant to a Decree in Divorce of the cumberland County Court of Common Pleas on September 16, 1997. 14. The parties are the parents of two minor children namely, I Mary Chartres Metzger, date of birth September 22, 1981 and Michelle Julia Metzger, date of birth March 3, 1988. I i I I 16. ; I ; I i 7. I I !I " I: I 5. The outstanding order for custody between the parties is an order dated September 9, 1997, which was modified regarding transport of the parties' youngest child Michelle by order of January 26, 2000. (See attached Exhibits "A" and "D") The parties oldest daughter Mary is a minor child, however, father refuses to see Mary and has no visitation with her. Father has visitation with the parties' youngest child, Michelle, every other weekend from Saturday at approximately 10130 a.m. until Sunday at approximately 6100 p.m., and 4 MEYERS. DESFDR. 6ALTl01VER' BOYLE 410 NORTH S[CO~~[) STRH' . PO OOX 1Of,1 , tiARAISOlJAG PA I1lOfl 1111) jlJtdJ04I'B . FA,)( 11171236-2811 every Thursday evening from 5:45 p.m. until 8:30 p.m. Father has been awarded vacation time with the children, however, he has never exercised his vacation time with the children. 8. Mother files the within Petition for Permission to Relocate, requesting that the Court permit her to l-elocate with the children to Chevy Chase, Maryland. Mother further requests that the physical custody arrangements of the Order of September 16, 1997 be modified to permit this relocation. 9. Mother requests permission to relocate to Chevy Chase, Maryland, as this is where Mother's family resides and this would provide mother and the children with an extensive support system. lO. Mother further requests permission to relocate with the children to Chevy Chase, Maryland as she believes it would ,I 11. i 12. I Ii II , ; , I , I I Ii afford herself and the children a better standard of living and better lifestyle. Mother's relocation to Chevy Chase, Maryland, while out of state would merely be a transport time between the two parties' homes of 2 hOlIl-S. Mother would cooperate wi th Fathel" to af ford him significant I visitation time with Michelle after her relocation. Mother would afford father visitation which would be comparable to the current visitation arrangement. ,- ~ MEYERS. DESFOR. 6ALTlOIVER. BOYLE 41OtjOnlllstcot-.OSTnHT . PO 00)( IOfl;' . tiARRISOunn PAl710l! I111J 2Jti-l;i<4i'e . fA);, 1111J ~3tJi't111 13. The child, Michelle has emotional problems and a learning disability. she is presently enrolled at Good Hope Middle School. Mother does not believe that there are sufficient sources at the school to provide for Michelle's learning disability. Mother believes and therefore, avers that there are more suitable schools and learning opportunities available for Michelle in Chevy Chase, Maryland to help her to assist her with her learning disability. 14. Mother believes and therefore avers that relocation to chevy Chase, Maryland would improve the quality of life for herself and the children, as follows: a. Mother's extended family all reside in the Chevy Chase area including the children's grandmother, their three aunts and cousins. b. There are numerous social and cultural events which the children will have access to in the Chevy Chase area, which are not available to them in their present surroundings. Additionally. the children will be able to attend these events with their cousins, as they have i I I c. i i I , I ,I I' I' , j; I! previously felt left out of these events. There are excellent schools in the Chevy Chase area and' Michelle would attend the Montgomery County schools. The Montgomery County schools will offer Michelle more levels of learning support, with organizational classes and more personal attention than is presently availablel 6 MEYERS, DESFOR. SAlTZGIYER & BGYlE 410 NDrUIi SECOND STAHl . PO 00)( lOti;:' . IlAAlllSnURG PA 17101' (717) 2369428 . tAx 1111l23fdR17 PATRICIA MI!TZGER, Plaintiff v. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 95-6329 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION. LAW : IN CUSTODY MICHAEL J. METZGER Defendent STIPULATION FOR AN AGREED ORDER OF CUSTODY AND NOW, the parties stipulate and agree as follows: '1 I, LEGAL CUSTODY . 1. The parties hereby agree to share legal custody of their minor ch)ldren: \" .'. Mary Metzger, born September 22, 1981, and Michelle Metzger, born March 3, 1988. All decisions affecting the chlldren's growth and development including, but not limited to: choice of camp, if any; choice of day care provider; medical and dental 1reatment; psychotherapy, psychoanalysis, or like treatment; decisions relating to actual or potential litigation Involving the children, directly or as beneficiary, other than custody litigation; education, both secular and religious; scholastic athletic pursuits and other extracurricular activities; shall be considered major decisions and shall be made by the parents jointly, after discussion and consultation with each other and with a view towards obtaining and following a harmonious polley in the children's best Interest. 2. Each party agrees to keep the other informed of the progress of the children's education end social adjustments. Each party agrees not to impair the other party's right to shared legal or physical custody of the children. Each party agrees to give support 10 the other In the role as paren1 and to take into account the consensus of the other for Ihe physical and emotional well-being of the children. 3. While in the presence of the children, neither parent shall make, or permit any other person to make, any remarks or do anything which could In any way be construed as derogatory or uncomplimentary to the other parent. It shall be the express duty of each parent to uphold the other arent as one whom the children should respect and love. IXHIIIT I ----11- 4. It shall be the obligation of each parent to make the children available to the other In accordance with the physical custody schedule and to encourage the children to participate In the plan hereby agreed and ordered. 5. Each parent shall have the duty to notify the other of any event or activity that could reasonably be expected to be of significant concern to the other parent. 6. The parents shall communicate directly with one another concerning any parenting Issue requiring consultation and agreement and regarding any proposed modifications to the physical custody schedule, which may from time to time become necessary, and shall specifically not use the children as messengers. Furthermore, neither parent shall discuss with the children any proposed changes to the physical custody schedule, or any other issue requiring consultation and agreement, prior to discussing the matter and reaching an agreement with the other parent. 7. With regard to any emergency decisions which must be made, the parent with whom the children are physically residing at the time shall be permitted to make the decision necessitated by the emergency without consulting the other parent In advance. However, that parent shall Inform the other of the emergency and consult with him/her as soon as possible. Day-to-day decisions of a routine nature shall be the responsibility of the parent having physical clJstody at the time. 8. Each parent shall be entitled to complete and full Information from any doctor, dentist, teacher or authority and have copies of any reports given to them as a parent. Such documents include, but are not limited to, medical reports, academic and school report cards, birth certifica1es, etc. Both parents may and are encouraged to attend school conferences and activities. The Father's name shall be listed with the school as the alternative parent to be contacted in the event of an emergency and to be notified regarding school events. However, It will be the Mother's primary responsibility to prOVide Father with caples of report cards and all notifications of major school events. 9. Neither parent shall schedule activities or appointments for 1he chltdren which would require their attendance or participation at said activity or appointment during a time when they are scheduled to be In the physical custody of the other parent without that parent's express prior approval. 10. The parties hereby acknowledge that they have discussed and jointly made the following decisions: a. The parties agree that Good Hope Family Physicians will continue to be the children's pediatrician and accordingly, will provide medical treatment to the children when necessary. b. The parties acknowledge that the children's legal names are Mary Metzger and Michelle Metzger and that they shall be known by these names for all purposes. The parties agree that they will Instruct their respective families and friends that the children should not be referred to by any other names. c. The parties acknowledge that thay each expect the children to attend college and post-high school training if they are good students with a high probability of gaining entrance and succeeding In college. The parties agree that they shall each be actively Involved in the selection of an appropriate post-high school education for the children and that the choice of any college or Institution shall be mutually agreed upon by Father, Mother and the children, taking Into consideration the parents' then financial ability and economic circumstances, and the children's needs, desires, talents and aptitudes for post-high school education. llHYSICAL CUSTODY 1. The parents shall share physical custody of the children. Mother shall have primary physical custody. Father shall have partial custody on the following schedule: a. Alternating weekends from Saturday morning between 10:00 a.m. and 11 :00 a.m. until Sunday at 6:00 p.m. -....... b. Every Thursday evening from 5:45 p.m. through 8:30 p.m. c. During children's summer vacation from school, Father shall have custody of the children for seven consecutive days upon providing 30 days prior notice to Mother. d. Upon ten (10) days notice to Mother, Father may annually select and . tack onto any othar of his regular or holiday visits an additional total of seven (7) discretionary days, which may be taken one at a time or seven (7) days at once, so long as they do not conflict with Mother's scheduled time. 2. The parties shall share custody of the children on the holidays as follows: a. Thanksgiving - In even numbered years, Father shall have cus10dy of the children form the Wednesday before Thanksgiving after school recesses through the following Sunday at 2:00 p.m. Mother shall have custody during the same period in odd numbered years. b. Christmas - In odd numbered years, Father shall have custody of the children from 2:00 p.m. on Christmas Eve through January 1 at 4:00 p.m. Mother shall have custody during the same period in even numbered years. c. Father's Day and Mother's Day - Father shall have custody of the children on Father's Day weekend from Saturday at 10:00 a.m. through Sunday at 6:00 p.m. and Mother shall have custody of the children on Mother's Day weekend from Saturday at 10:00 a.m. through Sunday at 6:00 p.m. III. MISC~I=OUS ITEMS 1. Father's periods of partial custody shall not be exercised in conflict with the following Jewish holidays, which the children shall observe with Mother: Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Hanukkah, Purim and Pesach (first and second days). ,. . PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 9S"- I.. J~? e,....i t hn..,,, CIVIL ACTION - LAW vs. MICHAEL J. METZGER, Defendant IN CUSTODY COMPLAINT FOR CUSTODY AND NOW, Plaintiff, Patricia Metzger, by and through her attorney, Edward J. Weintraub, Esquire, files a Complaint For Custody against Defendant, Michael J. Metzger, and in support thereof, avers the following: 1. plaintiff is patricia Metzger, Mother, who currently resides at 3615 Dwayne Avenue, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055. 2. Defendant is Michael J. Metzger, Father, who currently resides at l09 South Street, Wormleysburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17025. 3. Plaintiff seeks custody of the following children: lWIl Present Address ~ Mary Metzger 3615 Dwayne Avenue 14 Mechanicsburg, PA (DOB: 9/22/81) Michelle Metzger 3615 Dwayne Avenue 8 Mechanicsburg, PA (DOB: 3/3/88) 4. The children were not born out of wedlock. 5. The children, Mary and Michelle Metzger, are presently in the custody of Mother, patricia Metzger, who currently resides at 3615 Dwayne Avenue, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055. 6. During the past five (5) years, the children, Mary and Metzger, resided with the following persons at the following addresses I Persons Address I2M..!! Patricia Metzger 3615 Dwayne Avenue 6/l0/95 (Mother) Mechanicsburg, PA to Present patricia Metzger 3615 Dwayne Avenue 8/94 to 6/10/95 Michael Metzger Mechanicsburg, PA patricia Metzger 762 Erford Road 1988 to 8/94 Michael Metzger Camp Hi 11, PA 7. The Mother of the children is Patricia Metzger, who currently resides at 3615 Dwayne Avenue, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17055. 8. The Father of the children is Michael J. Metzger, who currently resides at 109 South Street, Wormleysburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17025. 9. The parties are married. 10. The relationship of Plaintiff to the children is that of Mother. Plaintiff currently resides with the following personl Person Relationship None The relationship of Defendant to the children is that of Defendant currently resides with the following persons: Person Relationship None 12. Plaintiff and Defendant have not participated as a party or witness, or in another capacity, in other litigation concerning the custody of the children in this or another court. 13. Plaintiff and Defendant have no information of a custody proceeding concerning the children pending in a court of this Commonwealth. 14. Plaintiff and Defendant do not know of a person not a party to the proceedings who has physical custody of the children or claims to have custody or visitation rights with respect to the children. 15. The best interests and permanent welfare of the children, Mary and Michelle Metzger, will be served by granting the relief requested, inter alia, because the Plaintiff Mother has been one of the children's primary caretakers. 16. Each parent whose parental rights to the children have not been terminated and tha persons who have physical custody of the children have been named as parties to this action. All other persons, named below, who are known to have or claim a right to custody or visitation of the children will be given notice of the pendency of this action and the right to intervena. ~ Address Basis of Claim 11. Father. None ~. ......,....... - " ~ -,.. ~ \.., lA "',.. ~ a ,...". .... ..... if: \l ' ~" ~ i .: ( L., I", C,Tr;);r. !fl _. ,LJ.... 0 ~ ..... ...~: ':a'. .... . . 1\'\ (;')t-- .#.;. VI J.. ~~ ,,\~~/-' U-1C'l u;1.:' ~ ~ _I Id.t. tj ...... _. l""IUJ " t,'.ilL- ~ ~ , ~ ,i ~Jo.) \.J 0l. -t.}> V II' I,) -'/Vl1.1 PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 95-6329 CIVIL ACTION - LAW VS. MICHAEL J. METZGER, Defendant IN CUSTODY ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE I hereby accept service of the Complaint For Custody on behalf of my client Michael J. Metzger, which was filed on November 3, 1995, to the above referenced term and number. c - "~'" , Oatel-1Y,;1.0/q j- I I ro L:") .,. .. ~ -, , ~l:: , " L'- , .. m ,; , '" '. , ., r,) . l";,, j". " '"'" " L; ,;1"1 ..-...... ~I~ ", " :'} "" ;) '" ::.::; PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. No. 96-6329 Civil Term MICHAEL J. METZGER, Defendant CIVIL ACTION - LAW IN CUSTODY RULE TO SHOW CAUSE AND NOW, this ~ day of _vtv1,L)~ , 1997, upon consideration of the Petition for Leave to Withdraw as counsel for Plaintiff, Patricia Metzger, a Rule to Show Cause is hereby entered upon Plaintiff to show cause why the Petition should not be granted. RULE RETURNABLE r-J DAYS FROM SERVICE. BY THE COURj ) 4k// i , J. I '; !;g "'J i.:= lu},5 ...:t ,.~ , j );}, 1/: ~: . , . 0.. ~. "'1, r I:, "':J CO ..>. K . (UJ - 1:,- tI:tl, C,~ {.....,. ~i(iJ I:!~ ::. ,lei, oq -. ~ ,... a Ol ~'Ih ~i ~ 0Ii ;;; 1:;6 ~ . ~ II' o- f: ::'i ~! Ii- -~ t:1U - i~ b F= " j (. ..:~. 1 4 F , ~:/ it-' 1.-' -' ...i ,... c;.> " '-4 'j:~~ i~. .~ : i)" t.,: ... .;) lJ ) /~ r : I I I ! " CUMBERLAND VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT INDIVIDUALIZED EDUCA TION PROGRAM Format B School Age ......................................................................................... STUDENT NAME: Michelle Metzger MEETING DATE: jl-/.'l- IJ~ STUDENT BIRTH DATE: 00/03103 SCHOOL: Shaull GRADE: class of 2006 File No. 6193 SSN: Sludent Address: Mr. & Mrs. Michael Metzger 3615 Dwayne Avenue Mechanlcsburg, PA 17055 PHONE: 728-7646 IEP CONFERENCE SUMMARY: INFORMATION FOR PARENTS (check): .......... given 10 paronts nol needed LOCATION ollEP CONFERENCE: '_1i::M: ~scaxx. _TELEPHONE Dale CERIlEP INVITATION was sent homo: II / 1/ 11DnlelEPiNORA wassenlhomo: N/A / / THE IEP TEAM CONCLUDED THAT THIS PERSON IS: ~ EXCEPTIONAL _ NOT EXCEPTIONAL Inst~1 Group(s) Level of Intervention (e.g., ~ ES GS LSS SPL) Location of Intervention (bid g) DATE WHEN ANTICIPATED SERVICES DURATION and PROGRAM of programs WILL BEGIN and services 8/ 190 6/ /97 0/ 197 6/ /96 . , n() I.J Learning Support Supplemental Shaull BITamJIA: vJhe.n ~,pe.c.ia/t) rYt'..5ijned If\:Jtrw ~iO(\ r.~ ) IEP TEAM HAS ALSO CONSIDERED. (1Ilhe sludenl needs services Dr programs In an aro hockod. the schoolla to Includa a dascrlpllDn wilhln tho IEP goals. DbJecllvos andlDr aroas D' spoclally designed InstrucIIDn). (CONSIDER EACH AREA and ATTACH GOAL PAGE WITH PEL FOR EACH AREA CHECKED) (J Adaptive Physical Educallon (J Graduallon Planning I I Asslsllva Davlcas [I InlDrmallDn IrDm Ihe 1ST I I Behavior Managemenl PrDgrams I ] Sludent Heailh CDncerns I I EnrlchmenVAdvancemenl [I VDcallonal Assossmonl (I EllIonded School Yoar I ] Olher (spoclly): I I THE IEP TEAM ADDRESSED PLANNING FOR TRANSITION SERVICES (Soo Individual Translllon Plan SecllDn Df Ihls IEP for areas addrossed) TEAM MEMBERS: 'SIGNATURE NAME and POSmON (typed or printed) 'Whlla vour .Ignature on the IEP documents allendance, and not agreement, you mav INITIAL Agrae or Do Not Agree. (PARENT IS REQUESTING PRE HEARING IF THEY DO NOT AGREE) Agree Do NDI Agree CIRCLE II presenl(P) Dr cDnaulled(CI .L (r\/~tl\JJ\;)\~,--- PC Sludenl Michelle Mellger PC Paronl(a) Mr. & Mrs. Mlr.hnel Mellger PC Counselor ....&.<::... =(~ P C PIII.h.lellsl C la:xi(\Xl'l1 'fa:rclle r -d-r?-< t"';;;;.J~ ~Prosonl Toncher Marsha FDchVSusan Tassin P C Principal t@supv 01 Special Educallon Dr. Ronald E. Eckman m .. enD 7 PRO G RAM 0 V E R V I E W NlmelClall:y}Il:..hl..lIt.. ~l'l- OR Curricular Ar.. Go.1 Arll SPEC REG Tlma SpaclallV oaaTilnad Inllrucllon - __M__ -- -----.-.....- s EDUCATIONAl. S -- LlIluOI Artl - -- . - -- - 6 6 .1--.----..-- -.. ......... ..._00 -- - .......-....... - "-' 6 Mlthematicl - .. 6 5clencI . 6 SoclII Studies - 6 FIne MI S PHYSICAl. I PIMI Ed --- -.. 6 6 SOCIAL SCHOOL YEAR PER CENT OF TIME IN SPEC ED 4 EOlJCATIONAl. 4 4 lInllUllOl Art. 4 4 MlthIlTllli:8 4 5clencI 4 SoclII Studlel --.. -" - ..--... 4 FIne MI 4 PHYSICAl. 4 IPtiva Ed . 4 SOCIAL SCHOOL YEAR . PER CENT OF TIME IN SPEC ED - 3 EDUCATIONAl. ~ BmDDII 1M. (' I", I,. N"'" ,.ll" , ~ . "^~/- ,n 3 lInllUlOl Artl v- ., - .1", ""'"urnl ,'r/,,,'rd,"'" .~r;;;:r;:;;::;;7\. 3 ,/ 1...-' I,Llh '" .~.../- '~h,' ,', nhl;> 10 3 Mllhematlcl -1. .- 1- \~\,.. l' .-.": In\! !I. 1....li^1i 3 5clencI , .. '1 !i.. n l!dll\.'V, nv>i' "up,Vlfl h-/1 3 SoclII Studlel " .. "VI,,}/," ,r;'jh ,I mil:':" n.),1'I ./" ^{)(lri 3 FIne MI ..!.:.....:... 1..c.:J.L...aJ.Cl..l..J... tY- ' ":III'} -:j},- i11Y 1 - - 3 PHYSICAl. 'Ni",1'f./ I~. -iI,' r. J: J I /'Ii ~II" ,I r)VII- 3 I PhvI Ed ,/ Inl'., h" ,.."rJ'I.Jl':Ld.... ' j hr". " v -'- -- ...!::- - 3 SOCIAL 1-'" I... <:,',114 .(/ {,n" " SCHOOL YEAR 'lfl..!1.:f:._. .--............. ..._......... --- I ~ '1 .IT~~~.~.~1,1~~.!!:!~~_....... - -, -- f-----.---- RELATED SERVICES: SPECIAL TRANSPORTATION ~:tl .......-.. ........-~ -- ----.......-...-.-........ --. PT DI OT SPEECHUNQUAGE --- .........m................._.........................................-....... ADAPTATIONS IYES' NO CUMBERLAND VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT NOTICE OF RECOMMENDED ASSIGNMENT Form 3.1 School Age ................................................................................... TO THE PARENTS OF:~IIt(II~{r< "---'~o$~R Oulo: "/r.;> /'O.c. Building: J~( Dear $5. m, Ti"~2 _' This letter Is a follow-up on the rccent ml' meclinllalllllor your rcquesl regarding your child's program of cducatlon. 11l1s is intended 10 sunllllaril.e rcconllllcndatlons ur proposcd changes witl\ respect to your child's educational program and/or assignment. I hope that you huvc II full understanding based on the Information reviewed at the lEI' rneetlngand other cOl1lmunl~ation with sdlllol per~onncl as wllEP tCWlIlI1ember. The wignmcntrceommendcd for your chlltl is ;?FC, t.t ,.,f" j'-:~ 6'.eNlJC'- w,~mln,/ 5Llf'fod. This all1lnment was recommended after II review of the ullached options. which were used to lIlislst In Identifying the services and programs that will meet your child's needs. 1. [ J NEW ENTRY. Your child should begin 10 rcccivc SllCcial education ~crviccs. The school district will not proc:ced without your approval of this recommcndalion (The IEP is allached.). . Z. [JY CHANGE. Your child's special education placement or services should be chwlged lIS noted In the IEP. The school district will proceed with this change unless yoo nutify ns. withinlcn days, of your written disapproval. (The lEP is attached.). 3. [ J NO LONGER IN NEED. Your child is no longer in need of special education, We recommend CU/I'CI\t special education services be discontinued. The school district will proceed wilh this change unless you noUf'y us, within ten days. of your written disapproval. 4. [ J GRADUATION. Your child is graduuting frum high school. All special educallon services should be cillCOlltlnucd at the end of the current school year. S. [ J NOT EXCEPTIONAl" Your child Is nol in need of special education and should continue in hlslher present assignment. 6. [ J DENIED REQUEST, The school district b refusing your rC1lucsttu Initiate or change your child's: [ J IdcntlOeatlon [] Evaluatiun [ ) Educational placement [ J Provision of education 'thC reason and basis for this refusal arc all ached. 7. [ J Otherl &u, fJ~ltwtrlA") Orr N. Brenneman, Superintendent II-/~- 9( p Date You have certain rlshts which are described In the all ached Notice of I'arents' Rights. Plel15e carefully read lhe Infonnation. If you need more Informatiun. you muy contact: Harold L. I'omruning, Coordinator of Pupil Services, 6746 Carlisle Pike, Mcchanicsburll. PA 17055-179C1 (717697-11261) DIRECTIONS FOR PARENTS: Pleaso chock ono of Ihe opllons. sign Ihls form, and roturn II within 10 days to the person IIsled above. [ vt1approve this recommendation [ J I do not approve this recummcndatiun. My reason for dlsullprovalls: I request: [J A Preheuring Conferencc. [ ) Medialion" [) Due-process Hearing. . The enclosed Notice of Parents' Rights provides Infomlutlon onlhc options listed above. ~~~y ((-I') .er(1 -'GoO - Cf10c.&. Parenti Ilnature Date Daytime Phone " . STUDENT NAME: Mlch.lI. Matz\l.r SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: (Significant hlalorlc.1 Informallon and alr.ngth. and n..d. derived Irom educaUonal assessmonts, parental input, medical and olher documents). 1 . REASON(S) FOR REFERRAL: Michelle has been referred primarily due 10 d~liculUesln IIlSt gmde despite what appears to be average ability. There 15 concern about her vlsuel memory and language processing. In Iho classroom, sha appoarsto have dllllculty In relalnlng end following oral directions. Al Urnes she appears unfocusod but then will surprise slall and know an answer. Conversations wllh her can ba dlsjolnled and she doesn'l appoar to stay with topi c area long onough to complata a though!. Fine motor skills appear weak. 2. INFORMATION FROM THE PARENTS OR PERSONS WITH WHOM THE STUDENT LIVES: No InlormaUon provided at thisUme, 3. EDUCATIONAL, SOCIAL, AND PHYSICAL HISTORY: Kindergarten West Creek Hille Elementary Aret grade 10 current lime Shaull Elementary History of eer Infections. No slgnlllcantsoclel difficulties noted. 4. SUMMARY OF FINDINGSIINTERPRETATION OF ASSESSMENT RESULTS: Individual Psychological Examination: Wechsler Intelligence Scale 'or Children Date: 218/95 PSYCHOLOGIST Dr Coslett See Dsvcholoaical reDOrt' A. Inslructlonal Evaluation Results (Instructlonel Level, Rates of AcqulsiUon and RetenUon): Weaknesses ere noted In short term auditory memory and processing. Comprehension Is also a w8llk area. Word attack skills are strong, as Is vocabulary. Michelle benefits from both visual and auditory Input to reinforce each other. B. Ecological EvaluoUon Results (II appropriate): N/A C. Vocational Technical EducaUon Assessment Resulls (II appropriate): NlA Ii. STRENGTHS: Michelle Ie motivated 10 learn. If she Is com'ortable with her answer she will volunteer In class. Strong reading vocabulary and good fluency wllh oral reading are evident. She seems to do well with repetitious, concrete, visual tasks. Handwriting Including cursive Is very good. .. DEGREE OF NEED: Michelle Is having dllllculty staying 'ocused In class. She 15 exhlblUng some Inappropriate behaviors such as thumb sucking and chewing on clothing. Organizational skills are poor. Sell conlidence is low. Does not always participate In cooperative group learning, cOlJ'4llalnlng Ihat the othars are not Including her or Ihey are going too 'ast. This appears 10 be her Interpretation and not necessarily 'act. 7. Information FROM ob..rv.lIon. In the clllaroom .nd oth.r ..ttlnge: Michelle 15 left handed. She looks 10 others for cues. She Is very mellculous about her handWriting and may spend far too much time erasing to have It look "perfect". This ollen causos her to fall behind in completing class work In an acceptable amount 01 time. Michelle worries about being wrong and ollen requires reassurance thai she 15 right before completing work. B. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO IEP TEAM:(lncludlng eUgiblllty, speclally.deslgned Instruction, current program, change In programs, and othar Issues based on the studont's Individuals /loeds). RECOMMENDED EVALUATIONS: _X_ NOlle Relesl Other Michelle Is eligible lor learning support by virtue of a specific learning disabilily probably <.IysphoneUc in nature. She has other weaknosses Including speech/language problems and allention problems. ,_. -. I.....dw.hztd Edw:.... P""",.. R..",J J.....", 7. 1m I. S'ECIAL CONSIDERA nONS nlE IE' RAM MUST ADDRt:SS BEFORE DEVELOPING nlE IE' .. , A. II 1I1.1IlI"I...d Df V1.11&1f "pllred? x No - Yea. TtaIIllDUII oddreu U.. ,lllIllI ror OmllelllraiUc ulJlru4:ti..,....... 011 UlC 'luue..t', CWl'eId 1Ill11111.... .....lill. ....lWitill. - SliU,..... n...w...... ";11 bo irn:1U<IW ill lite oJ.:v.l",nnonl or U.. IEI'. YeI' TtaIIl.Jon 001.-1 10 eddre. the n<\llllhr Ilrailltlllrallle inlllUclion buN on the !Iludent', CUlT'el1l and fIlt....lI!aIIina and - Wrilina IIdU.1Qd .-u. .. II I" .....1 Dear or Htlri..-I.palftd? --L No - YeI - T aun mlltll<ldnu the 1IIIda11'. IlIl1Iuaac IIlU o:ommunlC4tion nlllllb, Dppol1unlti.. rill' dIra:Il:OI11IIIunlcatiOll ..;lh.... and proreuillllll, in UIClttIlIad'.la".uaae allu COuullwueatloulI1Otle. ~nic lel'd,lIll1lWJ rlll.e or'lCCdIlucllllliua IIppOIt\Illtja rill' dIra:Iln.llrut:tion in the thild'.lanauaac and cOllllllunlcalion mo.Je in the development orthe JEP, C Dan ... .1'''lnllJloll b.brian '''1 11II.... hbllltr 'una/.. or Iha' or DIllon? x No . - YeI - TtaIIl mlltl devclop llralqi.. includina pooiti.. behavior inlmentiOlll and I\IflPOI'II in the IEP. D. Dan I'" .......1 have UIllItd I.....h Prondloq'? x No = Ya. T taIIl mlltl ad.hu the 1II1IWIIe n""" or the 11..ten1 in the development or the IEP. I. Dan ... .....1 have -..katl.. __? x No = Ya. TtaIIl mlltl ad.hu the o:ommWlitltion I1CClIs orthe IIllllIeut in the deyelopmenl orlbe IEP. F. Dan ... .......1 NlI"'''' ,,",Isllya TKhool~ .>1... aad IIrvt...? x No = Ya- Taun mlltl adoRal the a..\Jtiyc tcchnollltly I1CClIs orlbe studdll in thcdevclopment or the JEP. G. Dan ... .....1 .... T.....1lIoe Stn1ceo? I. Wllllh.......... be 14 )'tin or..or older Il1lhla ....d.ralIoe oUhla lIP? No - Delete Section III X- Yes. TtaIIl mlltl ad.hu the .tudenl'. CO""" orlltu<ly and how ilIppliesto COIIIpOl\eIlIl orlbe IEP. AtademJtlr.oll e I (1encroI OUllnns Stlld...r'J C"",... II Sill ion V0C4t1llMllTedmitlllI VotatlonaJ . cult.... lllha1: j): J. WW lilt ...... be 16)'t1n or.. Of older Il1thl. tho dUfllloo or Ibll lIP or Is ... ...deol )'OII..r aod 10 ared or Tflalllloa Senl... a. detcralDtd by lhe lIP r...? x No . (lei... Section III = Ye. - Team IllUJl1 compl.... anu ~ SccliuulII. H. II Ih. ..u....I..UItla Ilt_ (3))'tIn or.fld..Uuo? x No - 00 10 SectiOll U - YeI - TCIIII mlltl ad.hu the OraduatiOl1l'l1Il beluw. PIa. rUf ....pledoa or_...,. .ftdll. ror IflduIUOII: Elibilit rill' uat.ion will be belICd U II: fl(ltiou A -COl11plCfiou orIEl' Bo.l.lUI\l ohjco:IiYe. (ShuuM he Iillked 10 I'lMn..1 courses) OR 11pIlou II. - COI11plellOl1l1fschool dlslncIIMcomeslSl1IldardJ 'Ir 'uu ...Icc.cd OptiOl1 0, choo.. OIIC oflltc Ihllo..;n8: Cour... II ui"""crlla (altJIch a It" or cour...) OR ^""IIlIlCll~ fOlh."..'IldeoI"UtlV, "ol!cnllrojCO:I, olltcre'<lUtDlional (..11th plUl) II!I' UA11: f 1/9/99 - IlotV2lX)(} Slude,., MIChelle MclJger }'OKrl11f9 .. IndmctulJ/,:.Jt'Jw'dhOn ,-,.,.,..,," n'VU,JJIJ"II""" " ''Noll IV. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES I A. SUBJECT ARlAl Rcadinll Mea.r.ble Annul Gonl : MklacUe 1l'U1lmprnve .".illall 11I1111 10 .be m.y oblaln allcut .. 10 % .n....e I. Iter da'teL 'AWlofA~_ : Rll~ P....ru. Rmort (KOYI I = 1181 IIl1lned Boal 2 = 7~% 10 99% allairunent J = ~U% to 74% aUalnment 4 = less than 2~% allainmenl CMjft1lvelBmc"""""': Will improve! rculbllM comp.chc.1tsiOIl "''''H(. of ~.~....... Cunieuhun hosed inslJUdlUn I.'IL.-I__~'~ As il occua in lb. tonlenl wall" d..s I Dele: t[]DDD LnwI"'A~ : RO% P,.nu --It (KI)') I . Hal atlllaed aoaJ 2. 7~%1099%allllnmclll J . ~O% 10 74% allairunent 4 . less than 2~% atlllnment ot)advelBmcIJ_l: Will unprOYC wu,d BUBCk skills MlIIIH(fI "'I..,...... ......: <':unicuhun hued """s_'111 ,....-..L...-M,,, Sdw~ AB il ocews in lb. tonlcnlle.uinl class llatc: ':i) IiJDDD 'AWl./A~: R()~ Pn.n.. ....on (KeYI I . lias attained goal 2 = n% 10 9'J% altailUllcnt J = ~()% 10 74% altainment 4 . less than 2W. attainment (J6jA1tvelBm,"'/fIIUl: Will increase 118ht vocalndlll)' .1/,,11011(. .//:......""., <':wncullll1ll...'ICd """"'111.'1\1 t....,..,;,. .I'c.......,.. AI it occun in the regular educalJUII d4JflUmn A I>Ble I!IDDD IEI' 1M IV. II/Y~111 IIIRI2IXMI Sluili.,tl MICheli. MeI/R"'T "oge J flIP , 0 . >f2 r:::.... 2 r- V) t .. . . . /I . , " ,. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II ~I ~I .. I , ! I ~:111 I i '~~1 It~ ii\ I '" ~ ~ t ~~ ',. .,,~ ~~.... '--' \J:J:: ." 'tl ':.i \;;l \<.l:-Q~ \,:).... ~ r\.l -f-. H I- ,.$! -.e: \~ 1-1J I}f I: .t' 1~ \J ':t: ~ - r- "- '" 'to ';:,) 'J ~ <L _4: \,j ~ ~ {' \~ :;) i c:::t ''-.J ,"" ~ t ~ r jl I j ~ '" b '" I J I I I I I I I I I I I . I I I I I I "..,..h1C,....,/j'."""""""',,'" (1'00,.,..", Type: Independent Local District Grade Range: PK _ 12th Schools: 184 Teacher: 7,159 Students: 125,023 StudenlfTeacher Ratio: 17.5 To 1 StudenULlbrarian Ratio: 651.6 To 1 Secondary StudenUGuldanca Counselor Ratio: 151.6 To 1 eNelghborhoods Education Index TII ~ ~ ~ 682 ~ General Facts FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY SCHOOLS MONTGOMERY COUNTY SCHOOLS 850 HUNGERFORD DR ROCKVILLE, MD 20850 301-279-3000 Student Enrollment By Grade FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY SCHOOLS Total Enrollment -128,882 iii Ol Ii or o ,..' U3 PI< K 3 4 5 Grade 6 7 8 9 10 11 National Enrollment Ranking' 20 of 15,679 (99th Pereantile) Stata Enrollment Ranking 2 of 24 (95th rercentile) N''Ghbulhood 6n.p Shot"" j I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,1 """..."'.'llOO__,... IIIOOlO''''''' Adult Educltlon Level For Loclllly of Bathe.dl 15.8% High School Graduate. 87.8% College Gradu.te. "B"""'""""" __". .....Ood'-IJII... &:mtWl9l1UII , Employment For Loclllly of Bethe.dl Average Travel Time To Work · 25.1 Minute. ,--....~. AlnI1In1.. .....'"r.... \ "dJU'l~aicnOw'O.'" / lIb..q,....1l ,... BlrMn".... "...11".. A.........cH.... u-,... 12111" ~ Occupltlon Nelghbofhaod ~... J I I I I I I I , I I I J I I I I I Adult Education Level For Montgomery County 90.6% High School Graduat.. 41.1% College Graduate. UB ~~"(le".. tblltS Qatp... ! .....""""123.... _00d_lZl2llj Cdl-.<bdc:;B 71If Employment For Montgomery County Averag. Travel Time To Wortc · 21.5 Mlnut.. tn.'9'l~ttylll' MftJt..w, &4'PI1111 t'l 1IlIl"lttt~_ ,'tdnalnoAwa.., o.l,121!JW 1~~"Q'14.'" hntnCl:l'W "~.121'''' ,,,.-'tI....ln..... Occupation 1 c.p,o~h1.'''''__,,", 1110OI.'''''' t~'ob...l""" Sn.p.6ho$'" ~ ". PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 95-6329 CIVIL TERM v. MICHAEL J. METZGER Defendant : CIVIL ACTION. LAW : IN CUSTODY Petition for a Finding of Contempt The petition of Michael J. Metzger respectfully represents: 1. That on May 25,2000, Judge Bayley entered an Order IN RE: CUSTODY granllng Patricia Metzger permission to move the minor child Michelle J. Metzger to Maryland. This Order provides for a new visltallon schedule effecllve May25, 2000. 2. Respondent has willfully failed to eblde by the order In that 1) Michael Metzger arrived at 10:30 A.M. on July 29, 2000 to pickup Michelle for visitation and no one was home. Mr. Metzger did see the child until 2:30 P.M. on July 29\11. No notice of the variation in schedule was provided. Respondent had sent an e-mail to pelllloner earlier In the week assuring him Michelle would be available for pickup at 10:30 A.M. on the 29"'. 2) Michael Melzger Is ordered to have custody of the minor child Michelle for two (2) three consecutive week perleds during Ihe 5chool summer vacation period. During the second of these three-week periods, Patricia Metzger allempted to get the child back Into her custody and to transport her to Mayland for an unspecified period on Ihe false pretext of establishing a mandatory appointmenl at the child's new school in Maryland. This appolntmenl was not mandatory and the child's allendance atlhe new school was not conllngent on Ihe child appearing In person In Maryland as Respondenl had represented. The appointmenl dales would have Interfered wllh and disrupted pelltloner's vlsitallon wllh Ihe minor child. As to item 1, Judge Bayley's Order specifies the vlsltallon schedule of Ihe lasl Custody Order would remain In effecl until Respondent moves Ihe child Michelle 10 I , .. Maryland. As to Item 2, Judge Bayley's Order specifies the parties will agree on two three-week periods during the child's summer vacallon from school. The agreed period this year 15 August 5'" through the 25"', and petllloner does not expect to have this period Interfered with or Interrupted at Respondent's pleasure. I would not pray for the court's Intervention In these matters except these Incidents amplifies my fear that problems such as these will continue after the move to Maryland. Pelllloner fears Respondent Is not acllng In the children's best Interest according to the dlrecllon and Intent of the honorable court's Custody Order and that the subslltute custody arrangement will not be carried out as ordered. 3. Pelllloner respectfully requests this matter be schedull1d to be heard on 22 August 2000 at 1 :00 before Custody Conciliator Melissa P. Greevy, ESQ along with my last pelltlon for civil contempt. This petlllon was not submitted Immediately after the Incident because the prior pellllon, dated 17 Juiy 2000, was not received by the Conciliator's office for scheduling until 9 August 2000. WHEREFORE, Pelllloner requests that the respondent be held In contempt of court, ~~ Michael Metzger 200 Lewis Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Petitioner I verify that the statements made In this complaint are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penallles of 18 Pa. C.S. secllon 4904 relating to unsworn falslflcallon to authorllles. ~ .. .. g-/>O<1JI ~) tM/v~ Date Michael J. Metzger Pelllloner 3 ,- If) G ("; .;1 " '5 ~;- " \I!' ~2 C1;S ' " < ,~ i -):r: , "L~ >: .)'2 :,'::) .'.1') ".1; ; F; ,c::,. 'J") ~.. .f (J.. ". ,.S (-". .J U CJ U . . -...: --. Iii: I :' II /lil)l!tIJ PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff/Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO, 95-6329 vs, MICHAEL J. METZGER, Defendant/Petitioner CIVIL ACTION. LAW CUSTODY ORDER OF COUiT ,. I .-, ( .. AND NOW, this t:..J day ofJ, {,. ~ ,2000, upon consideration of the attached Custody Conciliation Summary Report, It 15 hereby directed and ordered as follows: 1. Legal Custody. The parties, Patricia Metzger and Michael J. Metzger, shall have shared legal custody of the minor Child, Michelle Julie Metzger, born March 3, 1988, 2. physical Cuslody. Mother shall have primary physical custody; Father shall have partial physical custody on alternating weekends. Mother shall deliver the Child to Father by 8:00 PM on Friday evenings and Father shall return the Child home to Mother by 5:00 Sunday evening. If Monday is a school holiday, the period shall extend to Monday evening at 5:00 PM. 3. Holidays, A, Thanksgiving. Father shall have Thanksgiving every year from 10:00 AM the day after Thanksgiving until the Sunday following Thanksgiving at 5:00 PM, Mother shall have Michelle each Thanksgiving Day. B. Chrislmas, Father shall have the Child from December 25th at 1 :30 PM until January 31st at 3:00 PM, Mother shall have Michelle each Christmas Eve and each Christmas morning. C. Summer Vacation. Fathor shall have temporary physical custody during the summer vacation period each year for six weeks in two three-week continuous segmenls, The times each year for these segments shall be set by the parties no later than June 1st. D. other Holidays. The parties shall quickly adjust this custody schedule 50 Michelle can observe Ihe following holidays with her Mother: Rosh Hashanah (September), Yom Kippur (September or October), Hannukkah (November or December), pym (February or March), and pesach (March or April - first and second days). PATRICIA METZGER, Plalnllff/Respondent vs. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 95-6329 MICHAEL J. METZGER, DefendanVPelllloner CIVIL ACTION - LAW CUSTODY CUSTODY CONCILIATION SUMMARY REPOIU 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 18 as follows: NAME DATE OF BIRTH CURRENTLY IN C.uarODY OF Michelle Julie Metzger March 3, 1988 Mother 2. A Conciliation Conference was held on September 26, 2000, wilh the following individuals In attendance: Michael J. Metzger, the Petitioner, who appeared pro Be; and Mark Duffie, Esquire, who appeared on behalf of the Respondent, Patricia Metzger. Ms. Metzger did not aUend the Conference, but participated by phone when the Conciliator contacted hm ot work, 3, The case was before the Conciliator on two pelltlons for a finding of contempt. Father alleges that Mother has been In conlempt on three occasions In July and August 2000 The first alleged contempt occurred on July 13, 2000, when Father alleges that Mother failed to produce the Child for his normal regularly scheduled Thursday evening visitation which was to commence at 5:45 PM, The second Incident alleged was on July 29, 2000. Father allego8 Ihat he went to pick up the Child on July 29, 2000, which would have been his custodial weekend, however, when he arrived at 10:30 AM no one was home He later received II cnll from Mother at approximately 2:00 PM from the Respondent Inquiring as to his whereabouts The Respondent subsequently delivered the Child to the Petitioner for his cuslodlal weekend The third Incident occurred during Father's second three-week period of visitation which occurred between August 5, 2000, and August 25, 2000. Father alleges that Molher aUempted to Interfere with his custodial period by Insisting that the Child be returned to Maryland so that she could take her to a mandatory meeting al school. Father reports ho discovered that, In fact, the meeting could take place after his custodial vocation time nmf Ihat he declined to send the Child back to Maryland for this meeting 4, With regard to the July 13, 2000, incident, Mother reports that she was on vacation during this week. She claims that although she had attempted to contacttha Petllloner to notify him that she would not be home from vacation In time to deliver the Child for his Thursday evening period of custody, she wasn'l able to get through and then eventually lotally forgot that she had not reached him to discuss some rearrangement of the custodial plan during her vacation week. Thus, Father was never Informed of the schedule conflict. With regard to the Incident on July 29, 2000, Mother acknowledges that there was a confirming e-mail sent on July 24, 2000, Indicating that she would be bringing the Child back by Ihe following Saturday morning July ,29, 2000, However, she Indicated that she does not remember this Incident and doesn't know Why It might have happened. With regard to the third Incident during the Petitioner's vacation In August 2000, Mother states that she was able to accomplish the meeting at school and enrollment In school for the subject Child outside of the Father's vacation time, 5. The Conciliator met with the Petitioner and counsel for the Respondent and discussed the alleged Incidents of contempt with the Petllloner by long distance conference call. With regard to the third allegation of conlempl, the Conciliator Is of the opinion thai there was no contempt on the part of the Respondent. Although the behavior Father alleges could potentially have interfered with his custodial period, the fact acknowledged by both parties 15 that the Child remained In Father's custody during the entire period of August 5, 2000, through August 25, 2000, and was not taken back to Maryland for school enrollment until the conclusion of Father's summer custodial period, With regard to the other two Incidents, It appears that Mother has not, In fact, produced the Child during Father's custodial period as is required by the Court Order on these two occasions. Addlllonally, she offers no reasonable explanation as to why she did not follow the schedule In Judge Bayley's Order of May 25, 2000. The Conciliator notes that there continues to be great distress between the parties and that Mother does not view these Incidents as serious violations of Father's custodial rights, It elso appears that the parties would be better served by a modification to the present Order as is often the case with a resolution of petitions for contempt. The parties did agree to a modification of that Order In the form as allached, Ib/IY/2f) () lJ Date ( 1/6 /n,/t~ '.-Mellss'aPeel Greevy, Esquire . Custody Conciliator ,'.. ..~. PATRICIA METZGER, Plalntlff/Re.pondent : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 915-6329 CIVIL TERM CIVIL ACTION. LAW : IN CUSTODY v. MICHAEL J. METZGER Defendant/Petitioner Petition for a Finding of Contempt The pelltlon of Michael J, Metzger respectfully represents: 1. That on September 26, 2000, a Custody Conclllallon hearing was held before Melissa Peel Greevy, Esquire. Based on the recommendation of Ms. Greevy and the agreement of the parties, Judge Bayley entered an Order of Court on October 23, 2000. A true and correct copy of the order Is allached to this pellllon. This order provides for new transportation arrangements and a new schedule for Petllloner/Father's partial physical custody of the minor child Michelle Julia Metzger, born March 3, 1988, Parties agreed the new transportallon arrangements and the new schedule would be effecllve Immediately after the hearing. 2. Respondent has Willfully failed to abide by the order In that the child Michelle was brought to Petllloner's home late on 5 of the 12 occasions of Pelltloner's physical custody. The order specifies that Molher will deliver the child to Father by 8:00 PM on Friday evening. On October 6'h, Respondent was 50 minutes late; on November 171h, Respondent was one 1 hour and 20 minutes late; on January 1211" 2001, Respondent was 13 hours and 25 minutes late; on February 911', Raspondent was 51 minutes late; on February 23"', Respondent was 13 hours end 12 minutes late. 3, I would not bring these breeches to the Court's attention except that Petitioner has sent 3 lellers of protest to Respondent and Respondent's Altorney Indicating Incidents of lateness are not acceptable. I was going to write a 4l1'leller, but I submit this pelltlon Instead because: A. Previous lellers were Ignored, and '.1,. .... . OCT 2 0 zooofIJ . PATRICIA METZGER. Plalntlff/Relpondent VB, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 95-6329 CIVIL ACTION. LAW CUSTODY MICHAEL J. METZGER, DefendanVPetltloner ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 23 day of (()c.tob e tl , 2000, upon conslderallon of the attached Custody Conciliation Summary Report, It Is hereby directed and ordered as follows: 1, Legal Custody, The parties, Patricia Metzger and Miehael J, Metzger, shall have shared legal custody of the minor Child, Michelle Julie Metzger, born March 3, 1988. 2. Physical Custody, Mother shall have primary physical custody; Father shall have partial physical custody on alternating weekends, Mother shall deliver the Child to Father by 8:00 PM on Friday evenings and Father shall return the Child home to Mother by 5:00 Sunday evening, If Monday Is a school holiday, the period shall extend to Monday evening at 5:00 PM. 3. Holidays. A. Thanksgiving. Father shall have Thanksgiving every year from 10:00 AM the day after Thanksgiving until the Sunday following Thanksgiving at 5:00 PM. Mother shall have Michelle each Thanksgiving Day, B. Chrislmas. Father shall have the Child from December 25th at1 :30 PM until January 31st at 3:00 PM. Mother shall have Michelle each Christmas Eve and each Christmas morning. C, Summer Vacation. Father shall have temporary physical custody during the summer vacation period each year for six weeks In two three-week continuous segments. The times each year for these segments shall be set by the parties no later than June 1 st. D. Other Holidays. The parties shall quickly adjust this custody schedule so Michelle can observe the fOllowing holidays with her Mother: Rosh Hashanah (September), Yom Kippur (September or October), Hannukkah (November or December), Pym (February or March), and Pesach (March or April. first and second days). .' .,. No. 95-6329 4. Neither party shall do or say anything which may estrange the child from the other parent, Injure the opinion of the Child as to the other parent, or hamper the free and natural development of the Child's love and respect for the other parent. Each parent shall ensure that third parties also comply with this provision during his or her periods of custody. 5. Transportation, The Father, or his designee, shall transport Michelle at the end of each of his temporary custodial periods and the Mother, or her designee, shall provide the transportation at the conclusion of her period of custody. It shall be acceptable for Katie White to provide transportallon In the event that Mother Is not able to do so. In light of the physical distance between the parties, communication may be necessary with regards to delays In travel times due to road and weather conditions. Therefore, the parties are encouraged to make use of Father's cell phone number and voice mall In the event that road or weather conditions will delay the expected arrival or departure time. 6. RespondenVMother Is advised that this Court takes very seriously her responslbllily In maintaining and providing transportation so that the Child may maintain a relationship with the Petitioner/Father. Therefore, additional occurrences of Mother's failure to deliver the Child to Father In a timely fashion for his custodial periods shall be referred to this Court by the Conciliator for a contempt hearing wherein Mother may be subject to a fine, probation, or Imprisonment as provided at 23 Pa. C.S, ~ 4346. 7. Mother shall be required to appear In person for any subsequent hearing or pre- hearing conferences In the above-referenced mailer. BY THE COURT, 15/~J 11. /k g/ Edgar ayley, J. ~ i Dial Merk C, Duffle. 301 Merkel6lreel, po Box 109, lemoyne. PA 17lJ.43.0109 Micheel Metzger, Pro 6e, 2000 lewla 61reel. H8rrlaburg. PA 17110 . TRII': COpy FROM RECORD In : I .."my whereof, I here unto let my hand ;~~ th.~.iJ sal co~rt ~cl;I~, Po, :'..........'4.... 'r PrOfhonolllY . >- -. f': ~ u: , " ,. 'II rJ ~~ ';)-. . . ' ,;. ," C"'- t.- :f. ',', l.-j ~ ff.' <:'0 ,., " a ,.:'0;;,;. ~ i ~ ill . ;I; [1. .' ,< () 0"- '-' CJ d 0 . ~ i & ~ '. ~ ' PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. 95-6329 CIVIL TERM MICHAEL J. METZGER Defendant : CIVIL ACTION. LAW : IN CUSTODY ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this , upon consideration of the attached petition fof a Finding of Contempt Is scheduled for Conciliation, 11 Is hereby directed that their parties and their respective counsel appear before Mell..a Peel Greevy, Esq., the conciliator. at214 Senate Avenue, Suite 105 Camp HIli, PA 17110 on the day of at for a Pra-Hearlng Conference. At such conference, an effort will be made to resolve the Issues In dispute, and to enter a temporary order. Failure to appear at the conference may provide groundS for entry of a temporary or permanent order, BY THE COURT: Date of Order: JUDGE The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County Is required by law to comply with the Americans with Dlsabllllles Act of 1990. For Information about accessible facUllles and reasonable accommodations avallabla to disabled Individuals having business before the court, please contact our office. All arrangements must be made atleasl 72 hours prior to any hearing or business before the court. You must attend the scheduled hearing, YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Addre..: Cumberland County Bar Association, 2 Liberty Avenue, Carlisle, PA 17013 Phone: (717) 249-3166 PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff v. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 95-6329 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION. LAW : IN CUSTODY MICHAEL J. METZGER Defend.nt ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this , upon consideration of the aUached pelltlon fof a Finding of Contempt Is scheduled for Conciliation. It Is hereby directed that their parties and their respecllve counsel appear before Mella.. Peel Greevy, Eaq., the conciliator, at214 Senate Avenue, Suite 105 Camp Hili, PA 17110 on the day of at for a Pre-Hearing Conference. At such conference, an effort will be made to resolve the Issues In dispute, and to enter a temporary order, Failure to appear at the conference may provide grounds for entry of a temporary or permanent order. BY THE COURT: Date of Order: JUDGE The Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County Is required by law to comply with the Americans with Dlsabllllles Act of 1990. For Information about accessible facllllles and reasonable accommodallons 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 aUend the scheduled hearing, YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP, Addreaa: Cumberland County Bar Association, 2 Liberty Avenue, Carlisle, PA 17013 Phone: (717) 249-3166 \ ' Mlchacl J Mctzgcr 200 Lcwis Strcct Hnrrisburg, P A 17110 8 Septcmhcr 200{) To Whom it may concern: 1 am petitioner in a mattcr scheduled to be hcard hy Melissa Pccl Grccvy, ESQ on 19 Septcmhcr 2000. A copy ofthc reschedulcd Ordcr to Appcur \Vus scnt to me with a rcturn uddress of Plchnrd J. Plcree, Court Administrutor (attachmcnt I). My Pctition filr Civil Contcmpt to be addressed ut hcuring wus filcd with the Prothonotary ofCumberlund County on2l July 2000, Somcwhere in thc middle of the scheduling and the re-scheduling oflhe original hearing, I submitted anothcr petition for Civil Contempt, rcceived by Prothonotary on 18 August 2000, but rcturned to mc with the attached Ictter doted 8-18-00 (nttachment2). Although the background is complicated, my request is simple. Encloscd you will find one original and two copies of my petition 01'8 August. Also Enclosed ore two Orders to Appear. In addition, I have enclosed 2 setf-addrcssed, stamped cnvelopes. I rcspcctfully request you: I. Convey my petition to the Docket 2. Allow me to consolidate both petitions (21 July and 18 August) so thcy may he heard on thc 19u, of September, Ms, Greevy told me she believes my requcst is reasonuble nnd it would actually savc respondent on additionultrip from Marylwld. Both petitions have already been served on Respondcnt os well as the Order to Appear on 19 September 2000. Thank you in advance lor your consideration, Sincerely, Michuel Metzger . . . PATRICIA METZGER. Plaintltl'. IN mE COURT OF COMMON pl.EAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. No. 95-6329 Civil Action - Law MICHAEL METZGER IN CUSTODY Delcndunl. ORDER OF COURT ANI> NO\\'. this :!4th da)' of August, 2000, upon consideration of the request of the Plaintiff. the Petition for a Finding of Contempt is rescheduled for Conciliation, It is hereb)' directed that their panics and their respective counsel appear before Melina Peel Gree\')', Elq.. the conciliator. al214 Senile AnDue Suite 105 Camp Hili, PA 17011 on the 191h da)' of Seplember, 2000119115 I.m. for a Pre-Hearing Conference. At such conference, an efl'on will be made to resolve the issues In dispute, and to enter a lempol1ll')' order. Failure 10 appear at the conference may provide grounds for entl)' of a temporal)' or penn anent order, FOR THE COURT. rk-l The Coun of Common Pleas of Cumberland Count)' is required b)' law to compl)' with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. For infonnntlon about accessible facilities and reasonable accommodations available to disabled individual having business before the coun. please conlact our office. All alT8l1gements must be made at least 72 hours prior to any hearing or business before the coun, You must nllend the scheduled conference or hearing. YOII SIIOULD TAKE mls PAPER TO YOUR ATTORNEY AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HA VE AN Arl'ORNEY OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE. GO TO OR TELEPHONE TIlE OFFICE SET FORm BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 2 Libert)' A venue Carlisle. Pennsylvania 17013 Telephone (717) 249-3166 ~ .! fr tt~dl\,,^ev\.' .:ff-\ . .' . . ~~ - .... ' ":'::-:....---- 4 ' -- --- _ il).. 0, , -,,":,:_ ~ U: 1:r~lOO~~ John E. SlIke Snlicilnr Curlls R. Lonll Pntlhllnlllnrl Rrner K. Simpson 1>Cf1ul~ I'fIllhnnnlnr)' clf)ffice of tbe ~l'otbonotarp' /!i:t11l1brrll1nb COllntJ' Date $J '8 ' 00 ")etz~,. TO: P1 ~c:haO? We are returning the enclosed transaction(s) for the following reason(s) : · Incorrect fee received $ should be $ . Need signature · Must provide duplicate copies of the proposed judgment, decree or order and stamped envelopes addressed to the said persons and/or attorneys for notification. Please note: This notification is not a substitute for service of process. · Ot~erreasonsYLn.L/) ~~ lA'j(~~ I .--A:1[4\~~~ {~/-,-"iliIL ~1~~~-~~itimJl ~~4 ..0 ; , .L- U1)'"" Note: Alllrans.cllons dlrecled to Ihls office musllndude a SELF ADDRESSED ENVELOPE WITH POSTAGE If a relurn receipt or certlncate II desired. PAYMENT or FEE at time of filing wlll be required in every instan::e. A-1t(t-clA vWJ-t'\ 1-* a- One Counhou~e Squnre . Cnrli~lc, I'clIlI,ylnllllll 1701.\ . (717) ~40.(,llj~ . Fax (717) 240-651.' . . PATRICIA METZGER, Plaintiff : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 911-6329 CIVIL TERM v. MICHAEL J. METZGER D.fendant : CIVIL ACTION. LAW : IN CUSTODY n t:' f '.. " 'Ji . PI, . I ., - " l,.' ~ ,0,--, ...~~ . fA ,-.: :j': . ',' ~. . t" ) ~~j '... , ! . :~ ... en . . ~ ~': , ... , , " Petition for 8 Finding of Contempt The petition of Michael J, Metzger respectfully represents: 1. That on May 25, 2000, Judge Bayley entered an Order IN RE: CUSTODY granting Patricia Metzger permission to move the minor child Michelle J. Metzger to Maryland. This Order provides for a new vlsltallon schedule effecllve May25, 2000. 2. Respondent has willfully failed to abide by the order In that 1) Michael Metzger arrived at 10:30 A.M. on July 29, 2000 to pickup Michelle for visitation and no one was home. Mr, Metzger did see the child un1ll2:30 P.M, on July 29"'. No notice of the variation In schedule was provided. Respondent had sent an e-mail to petitioner eariler In the week assuring him Michelle would be available for pickup at 10:30 A.M. on the 291h. 2) Michael Metzger Is ordered to have custody of the minor child Michelle for two (2) three consecutive week periods during the school summer vacation period, During the second of these three-week periods, Patricia Metzger attempted to get the child back Into her custody and to transport her to Mayland for an unspecified period on the false pretext of establishing a mandatory appointment at the child's new school In Maryland. This appointment was not mandatory and the child's attendance at the new school was not contingent on the child appearing In person In Maryland as Respondent had represented. The appointment dates would have Interfered with end disrupted petitioner's visitation with the minor child, As to Item 1, JUdge Bayley's Order specifies the vlsltallon schedule of the last Custody Order would remain In effect until Respondent moves the child Michelle to I ,. . Maryland, As to Item 2, Judge Bayley's Order specifies the parties will agree on two three-week periods during the child's summer vacation from school. The agreed period this year Is August 5'" through the 25"', and petllloner does not expect to have this period Interfered wllh or Interrupted at Respondent's pleasure. I would not pray for the court's Intervention In these mailers except these Incidents amplifies my fear that problems such as these will conllnue after the move to Maryland. Pelltloner fears Respondent Is not acting In the children's best Interest according to the direction and Intent of the honorable court's Custody Order and that the substitute custody arrangement will not be carried out flS ordered. 3. Petitioner respectfully requests this mailer be scheduled to be heard on 22 August 2000 at1 :00 before Custody Conciliator Melissa P. Greevy, ESQ along with my last petition for civil contempt. This petlllon was not submllled Immediately after the Incident because the prior petition, dated 17 July 2000, was not received by the Conciliator's office for scheduling until 9 August 2000. WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that the respondent be held In contempt of court. ~ /UflKf Michael Metzger 200 Lewis Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Petllloner I verify that the statements made In thl" complaint are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penallles of 18 Pa. C.S. section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ! v. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : NO. 15-63211 CIVIL TERM : CIVIL ACTION. LAW : IN CUSTODY (') ,-' I' ;~ I " ." r,' .) " 1 .: f; t,.: " , . , t . ,,! '.', f'J ".. " -. cr. " PATRICIA METZGER, PI.lntlff MICHAEL J. METZGER D.fend.nt p.tltlon for. Finding of Contempt The pelltlon of Michael J. Metzger respectfully represents: 1. That on May 25, 2000, Judge Bayley entered an Order IN RE: CUSTODY granting Patricia Metzger permission to move the minor child Michelle J, Metzger to Maryland. This Order provides for a new visitation schedule effecllve May25, 2000, 2, Respondent has willfully failed to abide by the order In that 1) Michael Metzger arrived at 10:30 A.M. on July 29, 2000 to pickup Michelle for visitation and no one was home. Mr. Metzger did see the child un\ll2:30 P.M. on July 29'h. No notice of the variation In schedule was provided. Respondent had sent an e.mall to petitioner earlier In the week assuring him Michelle would be available for pickup at 10:30 A,M. on the 29'''. 2) Michael Metzger Is ordered to have custody of the minor child Michelle for two (2) three consecutive week periods during the school summer vacation period. During the second of these three-week periods, Patricia Metzger attempted to get the child back Into her custody and to transport her to Mayland for an unspecified period on the false pretext of establishing a mandatory appointment at the child's new school In Maryland, This appointment was not mandatory and the child's aUendance at the new school was not contingent on the child appearing In person In Maryland as Respondent had represented. The appointment dates would have Interfered with and disrupted petitioner's visitation with the minor child. As to Item 1, JUdge Bayley's Order specifies the visitation schedule of the last Custody Order would remain In effect until Respondent moves the child Michelle to I .. ~.....~ ,. '. Maryland, As to Item 2, Judge Bayley's Order specifies the parties will agree on two three-week periods during the child's summer vacation from school. The agreed period this year Is August 51h through the 251h, and petitioner does not expect to have this period Interfered with or Interrupted at Respondent's pleasure, I would not pray for the court's Intervention In these matters except these Incidents amplifies my fear that problems such as these will continue after the move to Maryland. Petitioner fears Respondent Is not acllng In the children's best Interest according to the direction and Intent of the honoreble court's Custody Order and that the subslllute custody arrangement will not be carried out as ordered, 3. Petitioner respectfully requests this matter be scheduled to be heard on 22 August 2000 at1 :00 before Custody Conciliator Melissa P. Greevy, ESa along with my last petition for civil contempt. This petition was not submitted Immediately after the Incident because the prior pellllon, dated 17 July 2000, was not received by the Conciliator's office for scheduling untIl 9 August 2000. WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that the respondent be held In contempt of court. ~ lam- Michael Metzger 200 Lewis Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Petitioner I verify that the statements made In this complaint are true and correct. I understand that false statements hareln era made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C,S, section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ~ PATRICIA METZGER, PLAINTIFF V. MICHAEL METZGER, DEFENDANT : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : 95-6329 CIVIL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this '21\ day of June, 2001, IT IS ORDERED: (1) All prior custody orders are vacated and replaced with this order. (2) Patricia Metzger and Michael J. Metzger shall have shared legal custody of their daughter Michelle Julie Metzger, born March 3, 1988. (3) The mother shall have primary physical custody of Michelle. (4) Except as otherwise provided In this order, the father shall have temporary physical custody of Michelle every other weekend from Saturday morning at 9:30 a.m., when he shall pick her up from the mother's home, until 6:30 p.m. on Sunday evening when the mother shall pick her up from the father's home. If Monday Is a school holiday, the weekend period shall extend, at the father's opllon, to 6:30 p.m. on Monday. In that situation the mother shall pick up Michelle at the father's home at 6:30 p.m. on Monday If she Is not working that day. Otherwise, the father shall return Michelle to the mother's home on Monday at 8:00 p,m. (5) During the summer school veeallon period In 2001, Michelle shall be with her father from July 71h at noon until July 14th at noon. The mother shall bring Michelle to the father's home at noon on July 7th, and Ihe father shall take her to the mother's home at noon on July 14th. The father shall have Michelle from noon on August41h through noon on August 25th, with the father picking Michelle up at the mother's home on August 4th, and the mother returning her to the mother's home on August 25th. (6) For future summer vacation periods, Michelle shall be with her father for three weeks commencing on the second Saturday after school ends, and for a second three-week segment commencing on the first Saturday In August. The mother shall bring Michelle to the father's home at noon on the Saturday for the start of each of these two three-week segments, and the father shall return her to the mother's home on the Saturday at the end of each three-week segment. (7) Holidays: A. Thanksgiving: Father shall have Michelle every year from 10:00 a.m. on the day after Thanksgiving unlllthe Sunday following Thanksgiving at 5:00 p.m. Transportation shall be arranged by the parties. Mother shall have Michelle each Thanksgiving Day. B. Christmas: Father shall have Michelle from December 25th at1 :30 p.m. until January 31"1 at 3:00 p.m, Transportation shall be arranged by the parties. Mother shall have Michelle each Christmas Eve and each Christmas morning. C. Michelle shall be with her mother on the following holidays: Rosh Hashanah (September), Yom Kippur (September or October), Hannukkah (November or December), Pym (February or March), and Pesach (March or Aprll- first and second days). .~ .......t...,. - ,- . . v",,,,~,"'.. 'i!!~""'_~'"'-"" """C"-""'''""",,,'~~' ?i?u1~IA Me.1itJ~('" (1 10 Cr~.fO(' J 'Pr. 12-ocJc-lI "die r"\ '\) 'l.. 085- ( I 111 , l' J ( . " ......1"".... .' . (, " ~~-}, "'<>"'~'-__'''''''''''''~'1:.!:.lltl'l\._JJ._.L._ lll- - ~ t,.vJJ,~ st-rt\Q--r H;fWY"\.Sb ~ ~c\- l/\l b ~ \l!Wlel (vleizbt"r ~oo !,..<...;Ju S'trt'€-T N t\-({,~ b yf" ri\ '-J ,,\\ GI ~'---'::..t.,..~, '-..'llr'lY"" ,..~ , i I I I . J Mloheel J. Metzger, Pro Ie 200 Lewl. Street Herrllburg, PA 17110 Petrlele Metzger, Pro Ie 1710 Crawford Drive Rockvllle, MD 20851 ~ "'.....1.0( I., )1.01 ~. :.ae