Blogs / Events / Articles / News

Category:

Jurisdiction and Inconvenient Forum Under the UCCJEA

Issues pertaining to exclusive continuing jurisdiction and inconvenient forum in child custody cases are often hot topics among family law practitioners. Recently, the case of A.D v. M.A.B., addressed both of these issues. Because Pennsylvania adopted the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) a number of years ago, matter...

Read more >>

Changes In New Pennsylvania Support Guidelines

Pursuant to the Pennsylvania Support Guidelines, the guidelines shall be reviewed at least once every four years. After the most recent review, which began in 2007, the new Support Guidelines were adopted on Jan. 12. The effective date is May 12, 2010. The new guidelines differ from the existing guidelines in a number of ways. This article will fi...

Read more >>

Pennsylvania Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act: Contractors Beware!

Pennsylvania Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act: Contractors beware!
January 8, 2010

This article appears on the website of the North East Pennsylvania Business Journal and will remain there throughout February. It will then appear in the print edition in March.

 

By Jeffery S. Batoff and Nick Poduslenko

Read more >>

Enforcing Mortgage Payment Provision in a Postnuptial Agreement

The recent case of Miller v. Miller raises interesting issues for the family law practitioner. Generally, the Miller case pertains to a postnuptial agreement entered between the parties, which included a provision that the husband should pay for the mortgage, taxes and insurance on the marital residence until the marital residence was sold. The f...

Read more >>

Calculating Child Support: Private School, Stock Options, Perks and 401Ks

The recent Pennsylvania Superior Court case of Murphy v. McDermott provides the family law practitioner with reminders and clarifications as to calculating a party's income for support purposes. The Murphy case focuses on four main issues: whether a parent should be obligated to contribute toward private school tuition; whether one-time stock optio...

Read more >>

Entire Amount of Attorney Fees Request Warranted in Child Support Case

On April 8, 2008, The Legal Intelligencer published my article regarding the Pennsylvania Superior Court case of Krebs v. Krebs (hereafter referred to as Krebs I). Krebs I pertained to retroactively modifying a child support order prior to the filing of a petition to modify a support order. In Krebs I , the Pennsylvania Superior Court remanded the ...

Read more >>

New Jersey Supreme Court Limits Duty Owed by Dram Shop to its Customers

On May 7, 2009, the New Jersey Supreme Court took a step toward limiting the duty owed by a purveyor of alcoholic beverages to its patrons.  In Bauer v. Nebbitt, 399 N.J. Super. 71 (2009), the state Supreme Court held that neither the common law nor New Jersey Jersey's Dram Shop Act (N.J.S.A. 2A:22A-1 et seq.) imposes a duty upon businesses to...

Read more >>

Superior Court Rules Child Support May Survive Payor's Death

By Michael Bertin The Legal Intelligencer  June 9, 2009 It is understood by family law practitioners that child support generally terminates upon the emancipation of the child or the death of the payor. Pursuant to Pennsylvania caselaw, parents do not have a duty to provide for minor children in their estate. However, pursuant to the recent...

Read more >>

Pennsylvania Child Custody Jurisdiction Lost Despite Parent Remaining in Pennsylvania

In 2004, the commonwealth of Pennsylvania adopted the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, or UCCJEA. The UCCJEA replaced the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act, or UCCJA. It was believed that the UCCJEA would solve many of the problems that occurred under the UCCJA regarding child custody jurisdictional disputes. Under the U...

Read more >>

Incarceration Terminates Child Support, Remits Arrears in Plunkard

As most family law practitioners are aware, the 2007 Pennsylvania Superior Court case of Nash v. Herbster was a case of first impression applying the then fairly new Rule 1910.19(f) to incarceration as being a substantial change in circumstances for purposes modifying or terminating child support, after considering the official comment to said rule...

Read more >>