Pennsylvania

Under Pennsylvania law, a divorce can be either “fault-based” or “no-fault.” Grounds for a “fault-based” divorce include the following: abandonment (unmoving spouse has left the home) without a reasonable cause for a period of one or more years; adultery; cruel and barbarous treatment (unmoving spouse has treated movant in a way that puts his/her life or health at risk); bigamy (movant’s spouse married movant without first divorcing his/her spouse); imprisonment for two or more years; or movant’s spouse has acted in a way that made movant’s life unbearable or extremely difficult.

Pennsylvania is an equitable distribution state, which means the court will “equitably and fairly” divide, distribute, or assign the marital property between the parties, regardless of marital misconduct. “Marital property” generally means all property acquired by either spouse during the marriage. All property acquired by a spouse during their marriage is presumed to be marital property regardless of how title is held.

The determination of the nature, amount, and duration of alimony in the state of Pennsylvania is based on the court’s weighing of several factors. Among the factors considered by the court in its alimony determination are the following: (1) the relative earnings of the parties; (2) the ages and the physical, mental, and emotional conditions of the parties; (3) the sources of income of both parties, including, but not limited to, medical, retirement, insurance, or other benefits; (4) the expectancies and inheritances of the parties; (5) the duration of the marriage; (6) the contrib

Pennsylvania uses a system referred to as the “Income Shares Model” for determining child support. This methodology focuses primarily on the net incomes of the parents and aims to grant the children the same proportion of the parental income that he or she would have received had the parents not divorced. These guidelines were updated in 2026 to reflect increased net income caps and an increase in financial responsibility for each child.

In making custody and visitation decisions, Pennsylvania courts look to various factors in determining what is in the “best interest of the child.” The factors weighed by the court include: (1) the well-reasoned preference of the child, based on the child’s maturity and judgment; (2) the need for stability and continuity in the child’s education, family life and community life; (3) which parent is more likely to foster a relationship between the noncustodial parent and the child; (4) each parent’s history of violent or abusive conduct; and (5) specific criminal convictions.

This statute provides for Protection From Abuse Orders (“PFA Orders”). These PFA Orders act as a safeguard to victims and their children from a family/household member who is abusing them. The Protection from Abuse Act also provides for absolute confidentiality between a victim and a domestic violence counselor/advocate to encourage open and honest dialogue.

The defendant-appellant, the Court of Common Pleas, appealed a ruling by the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (“PHRC”) that the defendant discriminated against female secretaries with respect to compensation. The Court of Common Pleas was directed to upgrade the secretaries’ wages and to provide back pay. The defendant argued that the PHRC could not require it to increase the wages and also that it was not considered an “employer” under 43 P.S.

The defendant had sexually abused his daughter from the ages of six to nine. He was convicted of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, aggravated indecent assault, incest, indecent assault, indecent exposure and corruption of a minor. The nature of his crimes required the courts to determine if he was a sexually violent predator under Megan’s Law II (42 Pa. C.S.A. § 9792).

C.B. was arriving home from work when Joseph Eckrote leapt from his hiding place under the porch and “charged” at her. He demanded that C.B. get in the car and forced her to do so after she refused. Despite her yelling and struggling to get free, Eckrote was able to drive off with C.B.

Marcia Jones was killed by Anthony James Fiebiger and his friend. Fiebiger and his friend decided that they wanted to go to Grandview Park to molest and rape somebody. They encountered Marcia and asked her if she wanted to go with them to the park to smoke marijuana. Once in the park, Fiebiger strangled Marcia until she fell to the ground.