K.M. Jr. v. R.R. (concurring)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

J. S06016/13 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 K.M., JR., Appellant v. R.R., and J.L. and D.R. Appellees : : : : : : : : : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA No. 1482 MDA 2012 Appeal from the Order entered on July 6, 2012, in the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County, Civil Division, No. 14640 1-22 BEFORE: MUNDY, OLSON, and STRASSBURGER*, JJ. CONCURRING STATEMENT BY STRASSBURGER, J.: Filed: March 8, 2013 I join the majority memorandum. I write separately only to point out my disagreement with the trial court s characterization of Father s argument regarding Great-Grandmother s age and potential physical and health limitations as being discriminatory. 1 The statute provides that one factor a trial court must consider in awarding custody is [t]he mental and physical condition of a party or member of a party's household. 23 Pa.C.S. § 5328(a)(15). Furthermore, in at least one prior case, this Court has considered the health limitations of the party seeking custody when making a custody determination. See Vicki N. v. Josephine N., 649 A.2d 709 (Pa. Super. 1994). 1 The [c]ourt finds that the fourth matter complained of on appeal is discriminatory and is without merit. Supplemental Memorandum Issued Pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a), 9/5/12, at 10. * Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. J. S06016/13 -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.