Legal Opinion

Coco v. Vandergrift

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 29, 1992No. 3072PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOFFMAN, Judge:

This is an appeal from the September 5, 1991 order granting the preliminary objections of Karen and Craig Vandergrift (appellees herein) and dismissing appellant Anthony Coco’s complaint. Appellant contends that his complaint is sufficient to set forth a claim for custody. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

On June 21, 1991, appellant filed a complaint seeking legal and physical custody and/or partial physical custody of appellee Karen Vandergrift’s daughter. Appellees filed preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer, asserting that the complaint failed to state a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. John M. v. Paula T.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  2. Zelik v. Daily News Publishing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  3. Scott v. MershonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Jones v. TrojakSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  2. Strauser v. StahrSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  3. Paulshock v. BonomoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  4. C.T.D. v. N.E.E.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  5. C.T.D. v. N.E.E.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API