Prior to the enactment of the Divorce Code in 1980, parties obtained divorces by establishing fault grounds. Since the enactment of the 1980 Divorce Code, there have been several amendments to that Divorce Code with the most recent being in 2004, effective as of January 2005. As it relates to divorce, the significant components of the Divorce Code as enacted in 1980 were the inception of no-fault grounds for divorce. The fault grounds still exist, the most common of which are adultery and what is known as indignities. The fault grounds are found in Section 3301(a) of the Divorce Code as amended. The no-fault grounds are based upon what is known as an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. There are, in Section 3301(c) of the Divorce Code as amended, two possible ways for parties to obtain a no-fault divorce, the first of which is for both parties to consent to the entry of a Divorce Decree after the expiration of 90 days from the date of service of the Divorce Complaint. The second means by which to obtain a no-fault divorce is upon the expiration of two years from the date of separation. The date of separation is often a contested issue in divorce actions when the parties continue to reside in the marital residence but their lifestyle within the residence is such that they are living not as husband and wife but more as tenants within the same home. This is a factual determination based upon the facts and circumstances of each case. However, with the 2004 amendments to the Divorce Code, even if the parties continue to reside in the same residence and a Divorce Complaint has been filed, the service of that Divorce Complaint on the non-filing party will presumptively establish a date of separation. Additionally, the 2004 amendments have made significant changes in circumstances where the parties seek a bifurcated divorce, or where one of the parties dies during the pendency of a divorce action. The amendments have also brought significant changes to the standards concerning the interpretation and application of Prenuptial Agreements.

A second key component to a divorce action in Pennsylvania is alimony. First and foremost one must keep in mind that alimony is not automatically awarded in every case which is initiated in the Commonwealth. Unfortunately, the awarding of alimony does differ depending upon the county in which the divorce action is filed. There is no formula in the state law for the amount or duration of alimony. Instead, there are 17 factors found within Section 3702 of the Divorce Code which again are factually driven depending upon the circumstances of each case as to whether or not alimony should be awarded in any particular case. Many of those 17 factors are the same factors applied to the equitable distribution of the marital estate.

A divorce action has several separate and succinct components to it under Pennsylvania law. The first of those components, and perhaps the most significant in most cases, is the division and distribution of marital assets and debts between the parties. Section 3501 of the Divorce Code as amended, provides the basic definition for marital and non-marital property. Again, with the 2004 amendments, effective in January 2005, there have been changes to this particular section, specifically the definition of marital and non-marital property. A basic premise to keep in mind with respect to equitable distribution is that Pennsylvania is not a community property state. Further, it is not a state where the marital property is divided equally (50%/50%) between the parties as in community property states. In fact, the law in this Commonwealth is clear that an equal (50%/50%) distribution of the marital estate is not even a starting point for purposes of dividing those marital assets. Instead, Section 3502 of the Divorce Code as amended, provides 13 factors, some of which are more relevant and applicable than others depending upon the facts and circumstances of any particular case, for dividing marital assets and marital debts. Again, the amendments to the Divorce Code in 2004 added two significant factors to consider in equitable distribution. Those factors simply deal with the cost impact of the sale or liquidation of a particular marital asset and also the tax impact of transfer, sale, or liquidation of a particular asset. The starting point for any equitable division of the marital estate starts with the basic definitions of what is a marital asset versus a non-marital asset. Very basically, one must keep in mind that even property that a spouse acquired prior to the marriage and brought to the marriage may have a marital component. Further, property that a spouse is gifted or inherits during the marriage may have a marital component. For example, if a spouse brings a parcel of real estate to the marriage and that real estate is maintained in the name of that spouse alone throughout the marriage, the asset may have a marital component although it is characterized as a non-marital asset. In this particular case, the marital value of the non-marital real estate would be the lesser of the increase in value from the date of marriage to date of separation or from date of marriage to the present time (date of distribution). This is but one example of how a non-marital asset may nevertheless have a marital value for purposes of equitable distribution.

The custody process within the Commonwealth, does differ somewhat between the counties, but each and every case starts with the filing of a Custody Complaint. Typically, after the Custody Complaint is filed, the parents proceed to what is commonly referred to as a conciliation conference. The parties may attend this conference with or without counsel, although it is certainly strongly recommended that each parent be represented by independent counsel at the start of any custody action. Eventually, following the conciliation conference and various pre-trial procedures, including a pre-trial conference, the case ends up in a custody trial. Custody trials in Pennsylvania are held before a Judge. There is no entitlement to jury trials in custody cases in Pennsylvania. It is important to emphasize that a custody case may be settled at any point in time prior to the Judge making a decision following a trial. The paramount standard used by the Court in deciding the appropriate custodial arrangement is the best interest and welfare of the children. There are both statutory and appellate case law factors that the Court must use in determining what custodial arrangement is in the best interest and welfare of the children. The statutory factors are found in Section 5303 of the Pennsylvania Domestic Relations Law. The statutory factors that are typically present in one form or another in most custody cases include the preference of the child, violent or abusive conduct by one parent or the other or perhaps even of a parent’s significant other and which parent encourages or unfortunately discourages the frequent and continuing contact of each parent with the child or children. In addition to the statutory factors, there are numerous appellate case law factors that have originated from 30 plus years of appellate case law in the custody arena. One basic concept to keep in mind is that there is no longer a presumption that a mother is a more suitable parent. There is a general policy against the separation of siblings between parents' households unless there are compelling reasons to separate those siblings. Additionally, a most misunderstood perception is that there is a definitive age at which a child expresses a preference to live with one parent or the other parent. There is no specific age in the Pennsylvania law giving a child’s preference controlling weight in any custody case. Instead, the Court must consider not only the child’s age, but his or her maturity level, level of intelligence, and the reasons why the child is expressing a preference to live with one parent or the other parent. The reasons given must be logical and well articulated as opposed to those grounded in frugality and/or materialism. Our Judges listen and look very carefully at a child’s testimony, which for the most part occurs in chambers without either parent being present, to determine why or why not a child may wish to live with one parent or the other parent. Finally, it is important in any custody case to keep in mind that up until the time the Court renders its decision each parent has control over the ultimate resolution of the custody dispute. At the time the Court renders its decision, each parent loses a portion of that control, as the Court is compelled to tell each of the parents exactly how much time and when they can exercise that time with their children. The Court will tell the parents what holidays they will spend with their children, how much time they will spend during summer vacations, and even in some cases when they will be able to talk to their children on the telephone. Unfortunately, this is in many cases a harsh reality for any parent to realize at the conclusion of a custody case. This is exactly why it is important for every parent entering this area of family law to keep in mind that there are no clear winners or losers which is exactly why careful consideration must be given toward reaching an amicable resolution prior to trial. This is not to say that every case is capable of settlement because it is not and in those situations those cases must be taken to trial and the decision left to the Court.

Support in Pennsylvania is segmented into three areas: child support, spousal support, and alimony pendente lite (APL). Child support is generally (and we emphasize generally, there are exceptions depending upon the specific custodial arrangement) awarded to the custodial parent who has majority or primary physical custody of the child or children. The child support is determined based upon the Pennsylvania Child Support Guidelines which are, for the most part, income driven but do contain some provisions for deviation from the income driven guideline amount in specific circumstances. Child support is awarded until the minor child or children reach the age of 18 and graduate from high school, whichever occurs last. Again, we want to emphasize that there may be adjustments in the guideline child support amount based upon custodial time. Further, we expect there will be significant changes in the guidelines which will impact the amount of support to be awarded in certain circumstances depending upon exactly how much custodial time each parent has with the child or children. The second component of support is spousal support. Spousal support is grounded in the common law concept of each spouse owing a financial obligation to the other by virtue of the marriage. Spousal support is primarily income driven and is determined under the same support guidelines as child support. Spousal support may be obtained without the filing of a divorce action and there are certain circumstances where the spouse seeking spousal support may not be entitled to the monetary support because of reasons surrounding the separation or if that spouse is co-habiting with a third party following separation. Finally, the third component is APL, which is again determined under the same support guidelines as child support and spousal support. The purpose for APL is somewhat different as defined by the case law than spousal support. Specifically, APL is designed to compensate and provide for the needs of the financially dependent spouse while the divorce action is pending. The classic example given for the purpose for APL is to put both spouses on equal footing from a financial standpoint so that the dependent spouse is able to pursue his or her statutory rights to property and economic relief without having to compromise the pursuit of those rights as a result of not having the financial means. However, through the years this distinction of APL from spousal support has become somewhat blurred. The one clear difference is that a divorce action must be initiated before a spouse can seek APL as opposed to spousal support.

Collaborative Law is an alternative dispute resolution process that allows the parties to avoid going to court while still receiving the support and expertise of their family law attorneys. The Collaborative Family Law process does not rely on court-imposed solutions but focuses on family dynamics and eliminating the negative emotional, economic, and social consequences of divorce, separation and court litigation. Issues that can be addressed through the Collaborative Law Process include:

• Separation & Divorce
• Spousal Support
• Division of Assets & Debts
• Modification of Existing Orders
• Child Custody & Parenting Plans
• Child Support
• Ending Non-Marital Relationships

Click on the following link for a copy of our brochure.

Collaborative Law Brochure

The Parenting Coordinator works together with the parties to develop a parenting plan that is appropriate for the children and puts children's interests, needs and wants paramount. A Parenting Coordinator aids the parties in resolving disputes such as changes to the regular schedule, activity participation and/or schedules, medical issues or needs, and communication issues. The use of a Parent Coordinator is an effort to resolve disputes between the parties before commencing any litigation in court. The Parenting Coordinator is not mediation nor is it a substitute for legal advice. The Parenting Coordinator may be court-ordered or agreed upon pursuant to a stipulation between the parties.

Entry into a contract with a new spouse or cohabitee in order to preserve assets that exist prior to marriage or cohabitation is becoming more and more important and prevalent. Our courts have recognized the validity of such contracts providing that there is full disclosure of all assets existing as of the date of the contract. Our office will advise the client as to whether or not a prenuptial or cohabitation agreement is appropriate under the facts and circumstances of their case, taking into consideration the goals and objectives of the client, including the tax consequences of such an agreement.

The real estate practice in our office involves the negotiation and drafting of real estate contracts, deeds, mortgages, security agreements and related documents. It focuses on all phases of the purchase and sale of real property, including title searches, securing of title insurance and settlements. We offer representation, which is recognized for its high quality throughout the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, for the purchase, sale and refinancing of residential, commercial, industrial and investment property. In our real estate practice we represent home buyers/sellers, condominium and planned unit developments, homeowners associations, tenants, landlords, lending institutions, real estate developers and title insurers of real estate. Our real estate practice also involves litigation of all real estate related property matters including the obtention of permits denied by municipal authorities, actions to quiet title, actions in ejectment, actions to evict tenants, both residential and commercial, defective construction cases against contractors and the defense of contractors in defective construction actions. Our real estate practice extends to all counties in Pennsylvania and includes complex real estate issues such as deed restrictions and covenants, title defects and issues including reserved mineral, oil, and gas rights.

Partner William F. Hoffmeyer serves as an expert witness throughout Pennsylvania on real estate law related matters including real estate title defects, issues involving ownership of real estate and malpractice by attorneys and title insurance agents in the real estate field. He was quoted as an expert witness in the case of Gorski versus Jenkins et al,(Pa Superior Court.2002) 812 A.2d 683.

Our zoning and municipal law practice involves the interpretation and enforcement of federal, state, and municipal regulations and restrictions on land use and development from both the municipal and the applicant’s position. We represent clients in the obtention of variances, special exceptions and interpretations with regard to zoning of land use as well as subdivisions of land for private and large scale projects and land development. Our practice in this area includes presentation of cases before municipal zoning boards, municipal planning commissions, and municipal governing bodies in all areas of central Pennsylvania. In our zoning practice we represent private individuals, large scale developers and national franchisers and franchisees. In addition, we also represent select zoning hearing boards in York County.

Our attorneys will represent both mortgage lenders and howeowners in mortgage foreclosure actions. Our practice in this area involves resolving mortgage lending disputes between lender and homeowners prior to foreclosure actions and representation of lenders or homeowners in foreclosure actions.

We represent clients in the formation, purchase and sale of various business organizations such as corporations, partnerships, limited liability partnerships, limited liability companies, and joint ventures. We prepare contracts for our clients and analyze contracts prepared by the opposing party for our clients. Our clients in this area of our practice are multi-state corporations, Pennsylvania corporate manufacturers and service providers, small businesses and beginning entrepreneurs. The business litigation portion of our practice includes litigation concerning contracts, warranties, insurance coverage, unfair competition, auction of business real estate and personal property and related business injuries such as wrongful interference with contractual relations.

We prepare Wills, Trust Instruments, Powers of Attorney and other documents required in the estate planning of our clients. Our law firm is regularly involved in assisting executors and administrators in the administration of decedent’s estates.

Our practice in the elder law field concentrates in health care, medical and hospital related matters as well as the protection of personal assets from loss due to catastrophic physical or mental illness.

The employment and labor law practice in our office involves representing both employee and employer rights in the work place, in both private and governmental sectors. This area of our practice focuses on “wrongful termination” and employment contracts. We are also involved in representing employees and employers in a variety of discrimination actions. As a part of this practice we represent employers and their personnel departments, as well as individuals, in related disputes and litigation including discrimination matters before the various human relation commissions and in the state and federal court system.

Our appellate practice focuses on appeals from the local district justice courts to the Courts of Common Pleas, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania and the Superior and Supreme courts of Pennsylvania. We actively engage in securing appeal rights and the preparation of records and supporting briefs and present and argue all cases before the various appellate courts. Cases handled by our firm on appeal deal with virtually all areas of the law.