The definition of proceeding was finally addressed April 17 by the Pennsylvania Superior Court in Ferko-Fox v. Fox, 2013 Pa. Super. 88. The holding in Ferko-Fox is important for both the court and family law practitioners because it reinforces the procedural step outlined by 23 Pa.C.S. §6107(b), which requires courts to hold an ex parte proceeding on petitions for protection from abuse before issuing temporary orders.
The pertinent facts of Ferko-Fox are as follows: The wife, Donna L. Ferko-Fox, filed a petition for a protection from abuse order March 22, 2011, in the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas. As was the procedure in Lancaster County, the judge reviewed the wifes petition in camera, without either party present, and granted the wife a temporary protection from abuse order (PFA). Simultaneously, a hearing was scheduled for March 28, 2011. The temporary PFA gave the wife exclusive possession of the marital home in addition to prohibiting the husband, Jonathan P. Fox, from having any contact with the wife and from stalking or harassing the wifes mother.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
