205 A.3d 318
Pa. Super. Ct.2019Background
- Jennifer Courtney (wife) filed a Temporary PFA against Scott Courtney (husband) in May 2016 amid divorce and custody litigation; a temporary PFA issued then barred him from the shared residence.
- The parties shared custody of three young children; related custody orders followed and an interim order barred Appellant’s boyfriend from the home during her custody time.
- Jennifer filed a second Temporary PFA on June 22, 2017 after a contested custody exchange alleging ongoing psychological abuse, stalking, threats, and an incident where husband demanded entry to her home.
- On August 8, 2017 Jennifer agreed to withdraw the second PFA in exchange for court-ordered custody-exchange and communication conditions; no PFA evidentiary hearing occurred.
- That same day the court held a hearing on husband’s Emergency Petition for Counsel Fees, alleging the second PFA was filed in bad faith; the trial court found bad faith (focusing on alleged failure to prove forcible entry) and ordered Jennifer to pay $310 in counsel fees.
- The Superior Court reversed: it held the trial court misapplied 23 Pa.C.S. § 6117(b) (failure to prove abuse alone cannot establish bad faith) and the record did not support a finding of dishonest motive.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Jennifer) | Defendant's Argument (Scott) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused discretion in awarding counsel fees under 23 Pa.C.S. § 6117(b) for filing PFA in bad faith | Jennifer: No bad faith; withdrawing petition and allegations were not proven but that alone cannot establish bad faith. | Scott: PFA was filed in bad faith (vague/unsupported allegations; no testimony of forcible entry). | Reversed — trial court misapplied statute; failure to prove abuse alone cannot establish bad faith and record lacks evidence of dishonest motive. |
| Whether award could be based on dilatory/obdurate/vexatious conduct under 42 Pa.C.S. § 2503 | Jennifer: Not argued substantively here; no basis shown. | Scott: Initially sought fees under § 2503 as alternative. | Not addressed — trial court did not base award on § 2503 and appellate court declines to decide it. |
Key Cases Cited
- A.L.-S. v. B.S., 117 A.3d 352 (Pa. Super. 2015) (standard of review for counsel-fee awards)
- Hart v. Arnold, 884 A.2d 316 (Pa. Super. 2005) (defining bad faith as suit filed for fraud, dishonesty, or corruption)
- Condio v. Erie Ins. Exchange, 899 A.2d 1136 (Pa. Super. 2006) (mere negligence or poor judgment is not bad faith; bad faith requires dishonest purpose)