Legal Opinion

Jacob v. Shultz-Jacob

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 30, 2007PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

KELLY, J.:

¶ 1 These unconsolidated appeals lie from two orders, denying respectively Appellant’s complaint, lodged in York County, for sole legal and primary physical custody of the parties’1 four children, and her motion to join the biological father of two of the children in Dauphin County proceedings to resolve Appellee’s complaint for child support. We affirm in part and vacate and remand in part, and hold that, in *476the circumstances of this case, the doctrine of equitable estoppel governs the financial obligation of a sperm donor to support children in whose lives he is involved.

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. T.B. v. L.R.M.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  2. T.B. v. L.R.M.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  3. Gruber v. GruberSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  4. Charles v. StehlikSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  5. Young v. HippleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Com. v. Tanis, J., IIISuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  2. Grant Manufacturing v. McIlvain, G. & Williams, D.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  3. J.L.B. and S.B. v. J.B. v. E.K.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  4. LaCivita v. Town & Country Bar & Grill, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lawrence County2015
  5. McAllister v. McAllisterNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2010

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