Section 1915.4-1. Alternative Hearing Procedures for Partial Custody Actions  


Latest version.
  • (a) A custody action shall proceed as prescribed by Rule 1915.4-3 unless the court, by local rule, adopts the alternative hearing procedure authorized by Rule 1915.4-2 pursuant to which an action for partial custody may be heard by a hearing officer, except as provided in subdivision (b) below.

    (b) Promptly after the parties’ initial contact with the court as set forth in Rule 1915.4(a), a party may move the court for a hearing before a judge, rather than a hearing officer, in an action for partial custody where:

    (1) there are complex questions of law, fact or both, or

    (2) the parties certify to the court that there are serious allegations affecting the child’s welfare.

    (c) The president judge or the administrative judge of the family division of each county shall certify that custody proceedings generally are conducted in accordance with either Rule 1915.4-2 or Rule 1915.4-3. The certification shall be filed with the Domestic Relations Procedural Rules Committee of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania and shall be substantially in the following form:

    I hereby certify that


    County conducts its custody proceedings in accordance with Rule
    .


    (President Judge) (Administrative Judge)

    Note: Pursuant to Rule 1915.4-1, the following counties have certified to the Domestic Relations Procedural Rules Committee that their custody proceedings generally are conducted in accordance with the rule specified below:

    COUNTY RULE
    Adams 1915.4-3
    Allegheny 1915.4-2
    Armstrong 1915.4-3
    Beaver 1915.4-3
    Bedford 1915.4-3
    Berks 1915.4-3
    Blair 1915.4-3
    Bradford 1915.4-2
    Bucks 1915.4-3
    Butler 1915.4-3
    Cambria 1915.4-2
    Cameron 1915.4-3
    Carbon 1915.4-2
    Centre 1915.4-3
    Chester 1915.4-3
    Clarion 1915.4-3
    Clearfield 1915.4-3
    Clinton 1915.4-3
    Columbia 1915.4-3
    Crawford 1915.4-3
    Cumberland 1915.4-3
    Dauphin 1915.4-3
    Delaware 1915.4-2
    Elk 1915.4-3
    Erie 1915.4-3
    Fayette 1915.4-2
    Forest 1915.4-2
    Franklin 1915.4-3
    Fulton 1915.4-3
    Greene 1915.4-2
    Huntingdon 1915.4-3
    Indiana 1915.4-3
    Jefferson 1915.4-3
    Juniata 1915.4-3
    Lackawanna 1915.4-2
    Lancaster 1915.4-3
    Lawrence 1915.4-3
    Lebanon 1915.4-3
    Lehigh 1915.4-2
    Luzerne 1915.4-2
    Lycoming 1915.4-3
    McKean 1915.4-3
    Mercer 1915.4-3
    Mifflin 1915.4-3
    Monroe 1915.4-3
    Montgomery 1915.4-3
    Montour 1915.4-3
    Northampton 1915.4-3
    Northumberland 1915.4-2
    Perry 1915.4-3
    Philadelphia 1915.4-2
    Pike 1915.4-2
    Potter 1915.4-3
    Schuylkill 1915.4-2
    Snyder 1915.4-3
    Somerset 1915.4-3
    Sullivan 1915.4-3
    Susquehanna 1915.4-3
    Tioga 1915.4-2
    Union 1915.4-3
    Venango 1915.4-3
    Warren 1915.4-2
    Washington 1915.4-3
    Wayne 1915.4-2
    Westmoreland 1915.4-3
    Wyoming 1915.4-3
    York 1915.4-3

    Explanatory Comment—1994

    These rules provide an optional procedure for using hearing officers in partial custody cases. The procedure is similar to the one provided for support cases in Rule 1910.12: a conference, record hearing before a hearing officer and argument on exceptions before a judge. The terms ‘‘conference officer’’ and ‘‘hearing officer’’ have the same meaning here as in the support rules.

    It is important to note that use of the procedure prescribed in Rules 1915.4-1 and 1915.4-2 is optional rather than mandatory. Counties which prefer to have all partial custody cases heard by a judge may continue to do so.

    These procedures are not intended to replace or prohibit the use of any form of mediation or conciliation. On the contrary, they are intended to be used in cases which are not resolved through the use of less adversarial means.

    Explanatory Comment—2007

    The intent of the amendments to Rules 1915.4-1 and 1915.4-2, and new Rule 1915-4.3, is to clarify the procedures in record and non-record custody proceedings. When the first proceeding is non-record, no exceptions are required and a request for a de novo hearing may be made.

The provisions of this Rule 1915.4-1 adopted July 15, 1994, effective January 1, 1995, 24 Pa.B. 3803; amended November 30, 2000, effective March 1, 2001, 30 Pa.B. 6423; amended October 30, 2007, effective immediately, 37 Pa.B. 5974; amended April 18, 2008, effective immediately, 38 Pa.B. 1815; amended August 1, 2013, effective September 3, 2013, 43 Pa.B. 4702; amended November 18, 2014, effective in 30 days on December 18, 2014, 44 Pa.B. 7514. Immediately preceding text appears at serial pages (368270) to (368272).