Earlier this summer, the Pennsylvania Superior Court issued its decision in S.W.D. v. S.A.R., which involved a primary dispute around whether a five year old should attend public or church-oriented kindergarten. The essential question decided in this case is whether a school decision required the trial court to evaluate the 16 specified custody factors set forth in 23 Pa.C.S. 5328(a). The Superior Court’s decision provides the bench and the bar with a strong and coherent analysis of when the statutory factors must be applied to the facts. The Court cited to the statute itself, specifically that the factors must be applied to any form of custody, which is distinguished from custody decisions which may change terms but not form. The Court decided that a decision regarding schooling alone is not one that warrants analysis of all of the statutory factors. However, the Court did set forth that a school change that required a change in the form of the custody order may require the complete analysis. The Court did note that all of the statutory factors may become relevant in any custody decision and that both the factors and the role of any Court are to promote the child’s interest.
Read MoreAfter many years as a client, local businessman Henry Heintz sent the following letter after the resolution of one of his matters: “As a longstanding client of your firm, I recommend all of my family and friends for all of their legal needs to the law firm of Musi, Merkins, Daubenberger & Clark. Everything from estate planning, to civil litigation, to the areas of criminal law and family law, your attorneys are always there for me and my family and friends. Musi, Merkins, Daubenberger & Clark has the resources to go toe to toe with the largest law firms in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania while maintaining the type of personal relationship that is too often absent in legal representation. I am always confident that there is an attorney at the firm that will match any personality type and can represent any client in a way that accomplishes the client’s goals. From bulldogs in the courtroom to refined out of court negotiations, the men and women at Musi, Merkins, Daubenberger & Clark always make me proud to call myself one of your clients” To Henry we say a heartfelt, “Thank you!” for the kind words. From longstanding clients to someone dealing…
Read MoreOn April 29, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court adopted the federal automobile exception which allows police officers to search a motor vehicle when there is probable cause to do so, without the need to obtain a search warrant from a judge. PA Supreme Court Justice Seamus McCaffery wrote the majority opinion in the case of Commonwealth v. Shiem Gary (29 A.3d 804). Justice McCaffrey writes that “the prerequisite for a warrantless search of a motor vehicle is probable cause to search.” This is the same standard that applies under the United States Constitution; the same standard used by federal law enforcement authorities. Upon reading the PA Supreme Court’s opinion, most criminal defense attorneys agree that the legal standard for a vehicle search in Pennsylvania has not changed at all. Law enforcement officers will need the same amount of suspicion and evidence to search a vehicle now as they did before to obtain search warrant from a judge. The standard is still “probable cause.” The mere act of being stopped for a traffic violation is not probable cause for a vehicle search. Police need additional evidence that the driver is involved in illegal activity greater than the traffic infraction. It is important…
Read MoreEarlier this month, MMD&C Associate and Family/Matrimonial Attorney Lucas A. Clark, IV helped instruct a CLE Seminar titled “How to Handle Your First Custody Case” for the Family Law Section and Pro Bono Steering Committee of the Delaware County Bar Association. Luke is currently the Chair-Elect of the Family Law Section, which means that Luke will chair the Family Law Section in 2015. Luke helped instruct a group of pro bono attorneys who do not usually handle family/matrimonial law matters in handling their first custody case. Luke took the attorneys in attendance from the initial telephone call through the formal consultation all the way to the conciliation conference with the hearing officer and, if necessary, trial in front of the Court of Common Pleas. The immediate feedback from those who attended the seminar was that it was successful and well-received.
Read MoreAt a Preliminary Hearing in Darby District Court on Wednesday, MMD&C successfully represented its client in getting an Attempted Homicide Charge dismissed. Using the skills and knowledge obtained through years of experience litigating matters in the criminal courts, trial counsel was able to conduct a lengthy hearing, gaining valuable case information that will be used at trial. The client was facing a standard range sentence of between 8 and 20 years; this is now off the table with the dismissal of the lead charge. The case will be proceeding to trial in the Delaware County Court of Common Pleas. The client and her family are very pleased with the outcome of the hearing and with the firm’s diligent and zealous representation.
Read More