Whether you are the obligee or the obligor, an important thing to remember is that an ordered child support amount is determined based on Pennsylvania's support guidelines calculation of how much money it is believed is needed to support a child. Many people find themselves at Domestic Relations-whether as the custodial parent who is concerned about receiving enough support to provide what a child needs or as the non-custodial parent who is concerned about making sure that his/her support obligation can be paid-and it can be a very scary and intimidating experience. Of course, the entire process can leave both parents feeling like they lost: the obligee (the person receiving the support) because he/she feels that the ordered amount of support is not enough to support the child and the obligor (the person paying the support) because he/she feels that the amount is too high to afford.
The relationship between a landlord and tenant is a common, yet complex one. Beneath the surface of the exchange of money for a place to live are a series of transactions, promises and rights that are not always acknowledged at the start of the landlord/tenant relationship. For example, some landlords and tenants rely on a spoken lease sealed with a handshake. Of course a written lease may be a better option for both landlord and tenant as it puts each person on notice as to what there respective rights and responsibilities are. For tenants, make sure you understand all the terms in the lease. Typically, the landlord presents the lease to the tenant and most terms may be in his or her favor. Pay particular attention to clauses that set forth such things as responsibility for maintenance, what happens if the apartment is damaged by fire, how disputes are to be handled, and how much notice is required before a tenant can move out. These are topics that may not be an issue at the time a lease is formed, but can become critical at a later date.
Charles Henderson, 62, of the 300 Block of Washington Street was represented by Scott M. Wilhelm, Esq. Mr. Henderson was charged with First Degree Aggravated Sexual Assault and Second Degree Cild endangerment. . The first degree charge carried a sentence of up to 20 years in state prison. Attorney Scott Wilhelm successfully argued to the Court that certain prior bad acts were inadmissible. In particular, the State alleged that Mr. Henderson was involved in a prior sexual crime in 1986. This evidence was excluded and therefore the jury was unaware of this evidence. During the trial both Mr. Henderson as well as his accuser testified at length. As a result of Attorney Wilhelm's legal arguments and presentation of his case, the Jury Acquitted Mr. Henderson on all charges.