A Terroristic Divorce

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION – LAW

SONYA HEALY : #2007-12477
:
:
v. :
:
:
TERANCE HEALY :

PETITION TO VACATE THE ORDER OF MAY 9, 2011 FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

1. Plaintiff has filed a praecipe requesting that any Divorce Decree be deferred until hearings have occurred on unresolved claims. (Exhibit A)

2. Plaintiff has not filed any subsequent affadavit requesting a Divorce Decree under 3301(c) or 3301(d) of the Divorce Code.

3. Plaintiff has not served upon Defendant any subsequent document requesting a Divorce Decree under 3301(c) or 3301(d) of the Divorce Code..

4. Plaintiff has continued to file petitions with the Court which is indicative that Plaintiff has not filed, or intended to file for or request a Divorce Decree.

5. Plaintiff has not withdrawn her Petition filed on February 24, 2011.

6. The Court has not had a full hearing on the Plaintiff’s Petition and the corresponding Response / Counterpetition filed by the Defendant.

7. Plaintiff’s Petition of February 24, 2011 represents an unresolved claim, and in accordance with the Praecipe filed with the Court, Plaintiff does not intend to request any Divorce Decree until there are hearings on unresolved claims.

8. Defendant has not filed any document relating to section 3301(c) or 3301(d).

9. Defendant does not intend to consent to a divorce, or request any Divorce Decree, or to file any document relating to 3301(c) or 3301(d) until there are hearings on all unresolved claims.

10. The Court does not have jurisdiction to issue a divorce decree when the parties have not consented to or made any such request.

11. “The Court has made it clear that ‘unless and until a valid decree in divorce has been entered, then there can be no equitable distribution of marital property.’” Reese v Reese, 351 Pa.Super.521,506 A.2d 471. 473-474(1986).

12. The courts of common pleas are only empowered to make equitable distribution contemporaneously with or subsequent to a decree in divorce. Campbell v. Campbell, 357 Pa.Super. 483, 516 A.2d 363, 366 (1986).

13. This is because the settlement of economic and property claims is merely a part of the trial court’s broader power to terminate the marriage. Campbell, 516 A.2d at 366.

14. Equitable distribution is an incident of divorce, not marriage.

15. The parties have not indicated by documentation or action any intention to request a divorce decree. As such there can be no divorce decree.

16. As there is no valid divorce decree, there can be no equitable distribution order.

Whereas, the Defendant respectfully requests that the Honorable Court

(1) vacate the Order of May 9, 2011 which has not been issued in accordance with the laws and procedures of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, or The Divorce Code.

(2) instruct the Plaintiff to immediately reinstate medical and dental benefits for the Defendant; additionally instructing Plaintiff to immediately provide documentation and identification cards for medical and dental to defendant in accordance with Orders issued by this Honorable Court.

(3) instruct the Domestic Relations Office to continue/resume the collection of alimony pendente lite on behalf of the Defendant, while continuing the collection of arrears.

…until such time as there have been hearings on all unresolved claims, and the parties have consented to be divorced by requesting the entry of a Divorce Decree.

Respectfully,

Terance Healy
Defendant
Pro Se

VERIFICATION

I verify that the statements made in this document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the Penalties of P.A. C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.

_______________________________________
Terance Healy