Reece v. Reece
66 A.3d 790
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2013Background
- Husband filed for divorce on May 13, 2011; Wife accepted service May 20, 2011; filing completed August 19, 2011.
- Affidavits of consent and waivers of notice were signed August 18, 2011 and filed August 19, 2011.
- Divorce decree entered August 25, 2011.
- Wife moved to vacate March 13, 2012 alleging lack of jurisdiction because affidavits were signed on the 90th day after service, not the 91st day or later.
- Lower court denied the motion to vacate May 23, 2012; Wife appeals.
- Court held there is no conflict between 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 3301(c) and Pa.R.C.P. 1920.42(b)(1); affidavits were filed more than 90 days after commencement; and the decree was proper.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 1920.42(b)(1) conflicts with 3301(c). | Reece contends conflict; decree premature. | Reece argues no conflict; action commenced May 13, 2011; affidavits filed. | No conflict; compliance with both rules; decree valid. |
Key Cases Cited
- Danz v. Danz, 947 A.2d 750 (Pa. Super. 2008) (abuse of discretion standard for vacating a divorce decree; subject-matter jurisdiction requirement)
- Lazaric v. Lazaric, 818 A.2d 523 (Pa. Super. 2003) (procedural conformity to civil rules in divorce actions)
- Creach v. Creach, 522 A.2d 1133 (Pa. Super. 1987) (divorce procedures must satisfy Rule requirements)
- Aivazoglou v. Drever Furnaces, 613 A.2d 595 (Pa. Super. 1992) (proper commencement of action under Rule 1007)