Legal Opinion

Kulp v. Kulp

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 12, 2007PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY MUSMANNO, J.:

¶ 1 David D. Kulp, Jr. (“Husband”) appeals from the Order, which directed that the cremated remains of the deceased son of Husband and Georgene Kulp (“Wife”) be divided into two separate urns, and allowed each party to place their urn at a site of his/her choice.1 We vacate the Order and remand for further proceedings.

¶2 The trial court set forth the pertinent facts of this case as follows:

[Husband] has appealed our January 13, 2006 Order equally dividing the cre*869mation ashes of [the parties’] only son [“Son”] into two separate urns with each party having the discretion…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Pettigrew v. PettigrewSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
  2. Radakovich v. RadakovichSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
  3. Novelli v. CarrollSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  4. Griffin v. GriffinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  5. Stewart v. Schwartz Brothers-Jeffer Memorial Chapel, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1993

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Dep't of Pub. Welfare v. GantCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  2. J.R. v. L.T.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  3. Lawrence Higgins v. Frank Bonin Funeral ParlorCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2015
  4. Wilson v. WilsonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API