HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-7201 Civil
OLENA VLADIMIROVNA CORNETT, : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
PLAINTIFF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
:
V. :
:
JAMES ESTIL CORNETT, III, :
DEFENDANT : 08-7201 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: OPINION PURSUANT TO PENNSYLVANIA RULE
OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 1925
Bayley, J., June 30, 2009:--
December 9, 2008et seq.
On , pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. Section 6101 , Olena
Cornett filed a petition for a protection from abuse order against her husband James
December 12, 2008
Cornett. Following a contested hearing on , the following order
December 15, 2008
was entered on :
James Estil Cornett, III, shall not abuse, stalk, harass, threaten or
attempt to use physical force that would reasonably be expected to cause
1
bodily injury to Olena Vladimirovna Cornett.
James Cornett did not file an appeal from the entry of this order.
June 18, 2009
On , James Cornett filed a motion to vacate the protection from
abuse order. He alleged that his wife sought a reconciliation on December 25, 2008,
2
and he allowed her to move back into his residence. She left the country with the
children on April 18, 2009. Defendant avers that the conduct of plaintiff subsequent to
the entry of the protection from abuse order shows that she gave false testimony at the
__________
1
At the hearing on December 12 we also heard the merits of a petition for protection
from abuse filed by James Cornett against Olena Cornett. (08-7094.) On December
15, 2008, an order was entered dismissing that petition.
2
At the time of the hearing on December 12, 2008, plaintiff was staying with their two
08-7201 CIVIL TERM
June 22, 2009
hearing on December 12, 2008. On , the motion to vacate the
June 29, 2009
protection from abuse order was denied without a hearing. On ,
defendant filed a direct appeal from this order to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
The supposition by defendant that subsequent events shows that plaintiff gave
false testimony at the hearing on December 12, 2008, is wholly without merit. The
protection from abuse order was entered only after we found as a fact that husband
abused wife while they were living together. When wife reconciled with husband that
order still protected her from abuse at defendant’s hands. The purpose of the
Protection From Abuse Act is to protect victims of domestic violence from those who
perpetrate such abuse, with the primary goal of advance prevention of abuse.
Mescanti v. Mescanti
, 956 A.2d 1017 (Pa. Super. 2008). The purpose is not to
foreclose reconciliation just because abuse has occurred in the past.
There is no legal basis to vacate the final order entered on December 15, 2008.
Therefore, the order of June 22, 2009, denying the motion without a hearing was
3
appropriately entered.
children in a women’s shelter.
3
In his appeal defendant sets forth that there is no verbatim record of the proceedings
in conjunction with this appeal. While technically correct the motion to vacate is based
on testimony that plaintiff gave at the hearing on December 12, 2008. It is incumbent
on defendant to order the transcript of that hearing, have it filed with the Prothonotary,
and ensure that it is included in the record to be forwarded to the Superior Court.
-2-
08-7201 CIVIL TERM
(Date) Edgar B. Bayley, J.
Melanie L. Erb, Esquire
For Plaintiff
Paige Macdonald-Matthes, Esquire
For Defendant
:sal
-3-