Hunker v. Hunker (dissenting)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

J-A35008-12 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 MELISSA HUNKER, Appellee v. TODD HUNKER, Appellant : : : : : : : : : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA No. 1061 WDA 2011 Appeal from the Order June 8, 2011 In the Court of Common Pleas of Washington County Civil Division at No(s): 2001-2882 BEFORE: PANELLA, ALLEN, and STRASSBURGER,* JJ. DISSENTING STATEMENT BY STRASSBURGER, J.: Filed: March 1, 2013 I respectfully dissent because I do not believe that Father s behavior warranted an award of attorney s fees. First, I believe that the trial court s order setting the time for the hearing at which Father failed to appear is vague. It merely provides a rule returnable date with no express language indicating that a hearing will be held at that time. Second, and more critically, Father filed an Answer to Emergency Petition and Counter Petition for Relief on June 8, 2011, prior to 11:30 a.m., in which he twice requested a hearing. It would make no sense for Father to do so unless he misunderstood the trial court s order. Accordingly, Father s conduct in this case did not demonstrate[] a complete lack of respect for the trial court and the opposing party as the Majority suggests. Majority Memorandum at 4. Rather, it appears that Father * Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. J-A35008-12 reasonably misunderstood the order of the trial court, and he should not be punished for an honest misunderstanding. As a result, I would vacate and remand for further proceedings. -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.