AAML PENN RESOURCES
Congratulations to the Recipients of the 2026 Eric D. Turner Awards!
The Pennsylvania Chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers is pleased to recognize the recipients of the 2026 Eric D. Turner Awards. These outstanding law students have demonstrated excellence and a commitment to the field of family law.
2026 Award Recipients
Caitlin McElwee
Meghan Chawla
Brianna Collora
Nicolette Munaco
William Joseph Tarpine
Jermaine Harris
Benjamin Goldsmith
Madeleine Morales
Lia Rocchino
About the Award
The Eric D. Turner Award was established to honor and remember Eric D. Turner, a highly respected and beloved Fellow of the Pennsylvania Chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. Click here to learn more
This article is provided by All State Investigations, AAML Pennsylvania Gold Partner.
In high-conflict and high-net-worth divorce matters, financial disclosure is often treated as the roadmap to the marital estate. Tax returns, bank statements, brokerage records, business interests, real property holdings, and sworn financial statements can provide substantial information. But what happens when the roadmap is incomplete?
For family law practitioners, one of the more difficult challenges arises when a client reasonably suspects that the opposing party has not fully disclosed assets, accounts, investments, or financial relationships. The concern may stem from unexplained transfers, changes in spending patterns, a closely held business, cryptocurrency activity, offshore connections, or simply a lifestyle that appears inconsistent with the financial picture presented in discovery.
An asset investigation can help identify leads, inconsistencies, and areas requiring further legal inquiry.
A critical distinction in asset-related investigations is the difference between identifying a lead and establishing admissible proof of ownership.
Investigators generally do not have unrestricted access to private bank records, account balances, tax returns, or other protected financial information. Nor should investigative methods circumvent lawful discovery procedures or financial privacy protections.
Instead, a properly conducted investigation may identify information that helps counsel determine where additional scrutiny is warranted. Depending on the circumstances and lawful sources available, this may include connections to financial institutions, previously undisclosed business affiliations, real property interests, corporate entities, secured transactions, litigation history, cryptocurrency exposure, or other financial indicators.
That distinction matters. The purpose is not to replace subpoenas, forensic accounting, depositions, or formal discovery. It is to help attorneys ask better questions and direct those tools more strategically.
Asset concealment rarely announces itself clearly. More often, concerns emerge through patterns.
Examples may include:
No single indicator necessarily establishes concealment. However, multiple inconsistencies can justify a more focused investigation.
Divorce matters involving business owners can present particular challenges. Personal and business finances may overlap, and the economic reality of a closely held company may not be immediately apparent from a personal financial statement.
Questions may arise regarding affiliated entities, newly formed companies, related-party transactions, ownership interests, business assets, or relationships between the subject and other individuals or entities.
Corporate and public-record research can sometimes reveal connections that help counsel better understand the broader financial structure. This can be especially useful when determining whether additional discovery should be directed toward a business, affiliated entity, transaction, or third party.
Digital assets have added another layer of complexity to matrimonial investigations. Cryptocurrency may be purchased, transferred, or held through a variety of platforms and wallet structures, and its presence may not be obvious from traditional financial disclosures.
Blockchain transactions can provide valuable investigative information because many transactions occur on public ledgers. However, tracing cryptocurrency requires careful analysis. A wallet address is not automatically proof that a particular individual owns or controls the wallet, and transaction activity must be interpreted in context.
For counsel, the practical objective is often to identify credible leads that may support more targeted discovery, forensic review, or legal process.
The phrase “offshore assets” can suggest secrecy, but international financial connections are not inherently improper. Individuals may lawfully maintain foreign business interests, real estate, accounts, trusts, or investments. The relevant question in a divorce matter is whether those interests have been fully and accurately disclosed when disclosure is legally required.
Investigative research may help identify international corporate affiliations, property connections, business relationships, or other indicators that warrant additional inquiry. As with domestic financial investigations, the goal is not speculation. It is to develop fact-based leads that counsel can evaluate within the legal framework of the case.
The most effective asset investigations are rarely broad searches conducted without context. They are targeted efforts informed by the facts of the case.
Before beginning, counsel and the investigator should consider:
This approach can reduce unnecessary work and focus resources on the areas most likely to produce meaningful information.
In family law litigation, an asset investigation does not replace legal discovery or forensic accounting. Its value lies in helping counsel identify gaps, develop leads, test assumptions, and determine where deeper inquiry may be justified.
When financial disclosures appear inconsistent with known facts, the right investigation can help transform a client’s suspicion into a more focused set of questions.
And in complex divorce litigation, knowing which questions to ask next can be as important as the answers already provided.
Dear Fellows,
As my term as President of the Pennsylvania Chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers ends, I want to express my deepest gratitude for the opportunity to lead such a remarkable organization. It has been a true privilege to serve alongside colleagues who share a profound dedication to the highest standards of the legal profession. I was never so proud when I received the call from my law partner, Cheryl Young, back in 2013 informing me I had been accepted to the AAML. This truly is an amazing group of lawyers.
Looking back on this past year, I am incredibly proud of what we have accomplished together. Thanks to your hard work, we successfully expanded our high-level CLE programming, strengthened our legislative initiatives and continued to be leaders in the family law community. Whether you served on committees, contributed your expertise, or actively participated in our meetings, your commitment has been the driving force behind our continued success.
The bedrock of our Chapter has always been civility, camaraderie, and a shared pursuit of excellence. It is inspiring to see how our members not only elevate the practice of family law across the Commonwealth but also support one another with genuine fellowship. I especially remember the collegiality we all shared in struggling along during our retreat in October to answer the Family Law Jeopardy questions that were all created by AI! The look on your faces was priceless when I told you the source of the questions and answers!
I want to extend special thanks to our Board of Managers, our committee chairs, and our Chapter Administrator, Mary Adams for their invaluable guidance and support during my tenure. I am completely confident that our Chapter will continue to thrive under the leadership of incoming President Darren Holst and the rest of the executive team. I look forward to continuing to serve as your Immediate Past President and working alongside all of you in the years to come.
Thank you once again for your trust, collaboration, and friendship.
Sincerely,
Helen E. Casale Outgoing President, Pennsylvania Chapter American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers
This article is provided by Robert D. Weinberg, partner in the Pittsburgh, PA office of Pietragallo Gordon Alfano Bosick & Raspanti, LLP, AAML Pennsylvania Fellow.
A common premise in litigation or settlement negotiations is to start high (or low) to land in the middle. To settle at $500, ask for $1,000.
This premise applies to most issues. Except for custody. And this reality fuels client discontent in family law matters.
Clients often want to file for primary custody out of the gate based on their understanding of how settlements generally work. These clients want to “shoot for the moon and land on a star” (the metaphor has always seemed backward to me).
Except in extreme circumstances, filing for primary custody is a bad idea. Why? Because custody cases are different. Custody cases involve the most important relationship parents and children have in their lives. These are not “zero sum” scenarios where a loss for you is a win for me: a win for me could be a loss for the children.
Moreover, courts prioritize supporting healthy, stable, and safe parent/child relationships.
This is not to say that every custody case should result in a 50/50 arrangement. It is to say that parents in custody cases must always be consistent with their sincere belief as to what is in the children’s best interests.
And this “sincere belief” often requires some counseling. Parents in high conflict cases have difficulty seeing why the other parent (hereinafter, “cretin”) should have any custody or why that cretin deserves any support regarding his or her relationship with the children.
Reframing the conversation with clients at the outset is critical. Lead with the following questions:
If a parent is still insistent on seeking primary custody, ask the following:
Custody litigants often miss the point that the best thing they can do for their children is to give the children the opportunity to have safe, healthy, happy relationships with both parents. In fact, failing to do so can be a significant weakness in a custody case.
No parent is ever created equal, and each has strengths and weaknesses. Likewise, children have developmental needs that change through their lives. Starting from the premise that children benefit from healthy attachments with both parents helps navigate each variable implicit in these considerations.
Why does this matter regarding tactics and strategy in custody cases?
Strategy
The overarching approach to every case should be determining a consistent approach to supporting safe and healthy parent child relationships. To be clear, this is not the same as a presumption of shared custody—not even close.
Where there is an imbalance of parenting strengths, the “better” parent’s strategy should be to figure out how to support the child’s time (even if limited) with the “weak” parent.
Conversely, the “weak” parent should determine an overarching plan to address the legitimate concerns of the other parent, and to develop parenting skills that include emotional and psychological insight and focuses on augmenting the parent’s relationship with the child.
On both sides of the aisle, the strategy is to move in a positive direction as far as possible toward building and nurturing healthy parent/child relationships, regardless of the specific schedule.
Tactics
These are basically the same on both sides of a case:
These tactics buttress strategic goals in terms of promoting parent/child relationships. However, you are still a lawyer and it is important for clients
These tactics buttress strategic goals in terms of promoting parent/child relationships. However, you are still a lawyer and it is important for clients to know that, if these tactics fail, and your client has done everything to support the other parent but it is not working from a child’s perspective, you have also built your case.
Indeed, following the strategy and tactics outlined herein allows a parent to credibly testify in a custody hearing that he or she has done everything to support the other parent’s relationship with the child; it will also highlight any issues with the other parent that are interfering with the parent/child relationship; and it will inform the elements of a final custody order.
This approach requires patience and counseling of the client, especially because it runs counter to typical notions of settlement and litigation strategy. But it is consistent with expectations from the court; it supports parent/child relationships as much as possible; and it puts your client in the strongest position if the matter must be litigated.
This article is provided by Crossover Capital, AAML Pennsylvania Gold Partner.
In our recent Forbes article, How Digital Assets Are Reshaping Divorce Discovery, Alex Pron, founder of Crossover Capital, details:
Read more:
https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbesbusinesscouncil/2026/03/02/how-digital-assets-are-reshaping-divorce-discovery/
This article is provided by Conservest, AAML Pennsylvania Platinum Partner.
Divorce is not only an emotional process, it’s one of the most complex financial events most people will face. Matrimonial lawyers are skilled at navigating the legal aspects of separation, but the financial implications of dividing assets, liabilities, and potential future income streams often require specialized expertise. This is why close coordination between financial advisors and matrimonial lawyers at the beginning of a divorce case is so critical.
When lawyers and financial advisors work together from the start, they can create a coordinated plan that aligns legal rights with financial realities. Lawyers ensure compliance with divorce laws and advocate for their client’s best interests in settlement negotiations. Meanwhile, financial advisors can model the long-term consequences of settlement options. Whether it’s dividing retirement accounts, determining spousal support, or deciding whether to sell the family home(s). Without this partnership, clients may accept terms that look favorable in the short term but can be unsustainable over time.
Divorce cases can involve complex financial assets such as stock options, private business ownership, pension benefits, or investment portfolios. Lawyers will identify these assets, but financial advisors are best positioned to value them accurately, access tax implications, and project future returns. By working together, the legal team guarantees nothing is overlooked, and the financial team verifies assets are properly valued and the risk profile is properly understood. The proactive approach minimizes surprises and reduces the risk of post-divorce litigation.
The end goal of divorce is a fair settlement and a strong foundation for the client’s new financial life. A financial advisor helps the client transition from the old reality to the new one by creating budgets, investment strategies, and retirement plans. When guided by legal protections secured by the lawyer, these plans provide clients the confidence to move forward.
Reach out to Conservest to see how their team can help you today!
This is a re-post of an article by Zoe Greenberg, originally published on March 21, 2025, via the Philadelphia Inquirer.
The decision in Glover v. Junior was seen as a win for LGBTQ families and those using assisted reproductive technology.
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued a landmark decision on Thursday that established a new pathway to legal parenthood in the state.
The High Court ruled that in situations where aspiring parents use assisted reproductive technology, like IVF, with the intent to conceive and co-parent a child together, they have effectively proven that they are parents. They do not need to sign a formal contract or share genetics with the child to establish their legal parenthood.
“We believe the time has come for our law to embrace a fifth pathway to parentage,” the justices wrote in the majority opinion. “It is apparent that in some ways, parents who conceive using [assisted reproductive technology] essentially demonstrate their stability and dedication to a child by going through a more rigorous, time-consuming, and expensive process to conceive a child than do many parents who conceive through sexual intercourse.”
Pennsylvania does not have any statutes defining parentage, so it has largely been left to the courts to decide. The decision was heralded by LGBTQ groups and family law advocates as a major victory.
“We’re elated,” said Helen Casale, an attorney who co-authored the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers amicus brief in the case. “It protects all families in Pennsylvania that need to use assisted reproductive technology to start their families.”
The decision marked the likely end of a bruising three-year legal battle.
The case centered on Chanel Glover and Nicole Junior, a married lesbian couple who decided to conceive using IVF. They determined that Glover would become pregnant, and chose a sperm donor who shared traits with Junior. They went through the long, expensive fertility process together.
But the couple’s marriage deteriorated before their baby was born. In April 2022, Glover filed for divorce. Junior filed a petition asking the court to recognize her as a parent to their unborn child.
Soon after, a family court judge ruled in Junior’s favor, deciding that she was a legal parent to the child. Glover appealed to the Superior Court, which eventually agreed to hear the case en banc—a rare kind of session reserved for especially significant and complex cases, where nine judges are present.
In December 2023, the Superior Court ruled that Junior was indeed a legal parent for multiple reasons, including “intent-based parentage.” The ruling set a precedent, and meant that courts would take into account the intentions and actions of parents before, during, and after conception to determine legal parenthood.
Glover appealed again. On Thursday, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the Superior Court’s decision, rejecting the idea that couples using assisted reproduction should have to sign a formal contract.
“The decision made within a loving couple to have a baby is generally not a quid pro quo,” the Court wrote. “We prefer to recognize a more dignified means to establish parentage.”
“It’s pretty incredible,” said Megan Watson, an attorney at BKW Family Law who represented Junior. “It’s a decision that supports families.”
Watson said she aimed to return to Family Court as soon as possible to figure out a custody arrangement.
At the center of the precedent are Glover and Junior and a little boy who is almost three years old. Glover did not respond to requests for comment, though her attorney, Barbara Schneider, said in an interview they were considering their options.
Schneider expressed concern that the new legal framework would require courts to decide intent case by case, muddying the issue rather than clarifying it.
“I just think it’s an issue that should be properly left for the legislature,” Schneider said.
A bill to define parentage in Pennsylvania died in a Senate committee last year, though lawmakers plan to reintroduce it this year.
More than that, Schneider said, she felt her client’s voice was lost in what became a politically charged case about LGBTQ rights.
Junior was wrestling with her own reaction to her victory. On the one hand, she was overwhelmed with joy, thinking about the other people who would not have to go through what she did to prove she was a parent.
But she was also still grieving. The only time she has seen her son was in a grainy sonogram photo from before he was born.
“Despite this big win on behalf of families, if I can just be honest, I am also reminded of the three years — three years — our son has been denied my love, care, and stability,” she said.
Her grandmother died in January, without ever getting to meet him. Though Junior longs to hold her son, read to him, cook for him, tuck him in at night, she has no illusions that it will be easy to erase the last three bitter years.
Still, her eyes were now on the future.
“For me,” she said, “the next step is seeing my son.”
With case backlogs, judge shortages, and mandatory time limitations, it is challenging to have pendente lite matters heard. As a result, discovery disputes, temporary support motions, and custody issues are often delayed in favor of ongoing trials. Many of these issues can and should be addressed in private arbitration. Hear from experienced arbitrators on how they have been able to hear and resolve pre-judgment disputes through the arbitration process.
March 25 12 – 1 p.m. (Central Time) – 1 Hour CLE $50 (Fellows) – Login Required | $75 (Non-Fellows)
Paul Tusch Cacace Tusch Santagata
Richard Diamond Diamond & Diamond P.A.
Inquiries: office@aaml.org
HB 1210 was signed into law on November 18, 2024, becoming Act 146 of 2024. The Act amends 23 Pa. C.S.A. § 6108 to give judges in PFA actions the authority to grant temporary ownership rights to a pet (referred to as a “companion animal” in the bill). It also allows judges to direct a defendant to refrain from possessing, contacting, attempting to contact, transferring, or relocating the animal, as well as from contacting or entering the property of any person sheltering the animal.
The Act goes into effect on Friday, January 17, 2025.
The text of the Act will be available soon at the following link: Act 146 of 2024. A copy of the bill is also accessible at the same link.
by Amy J. Amundsen and Carolyn Moran Zack
In the 1989 classic film “Field of Dreams,” Iowa corn farmer Ray Kinsella envisions a baseball diamond in his cornfield with baseball legend “Shoeless” Joe Jackson standing in the middle and then hears a voice whispering, “If you build it, he will come.” After Ray and his wife Annie plow under their corn crop to build a baseball field, they risk financial hardship, but with the support of some imaginary and real-life characters, they persevere. In addition to reconnecting with his father, Ray finds economic success and personal fulfillment as hundreds of people arrive and pay to watch the National Pastime.
The phrase “If you build it …” has become a metaphor for the law of attraction, which suggests that using long-term goals to make specific, concrete changes in the present will help you to achieve those goals. Achieving resolution of family law disputes privately, more quickly, more cheaply, and with less adversarial posturing, are goals shared by family lawyers and their clients. Family law arbitration, which is the process by which parties voluntarily submit their claims for adjudication to a third-party neutral, allows parties to effectuate these goals.1 By recognizing the benefits of family law arbitration and encouraging clients to use this process routinely, family lawyers can shift away from the litigation forum into a trend-setting confidential forum of arbitration. With more family lawyers striving to reap the myriad benefits resulting from family law arbitration, trying it out in their cases, and working together to improve the applicable laws and rules, this method of resolving disputes may become the new field of dreams.
This article will help family lawyers guide clients who are trying to decide whether arbitration is appropriate for their case. Part I discusses what lawyers need to know to propose arbitration to their clients and opposing lawyers, including trends and research in favor of arbitration, the laws applicable to arbitration, the cases or issues that are appropriate for arbitration, and its advantages and disadvantages. Part II addresses the essential components of an arbitration agreement, including considerations for child-related awards, and distinguishes private judging. Part III gives an overview of the arbitration process. Part IV discusses techniques that can be used, including final-offer arbitration, mediation-arbitration, singleissue arbitration, and a panel of arbitrators. Finally, Part V argues in favor of the need for family law-specific legislation or rules to provide more reliability in the process and to protect the interests of family law participants.
View the full article here, beginning on page 65.
AAML Pennsylvania
Chapter Administrator Address:
215 East Ridgewood Ave, Suite 201
Ridgewood, NJ 07450
Contact Us
Email: info@aamlpenn.org
Office: (201) 445-7007
Social Media
Copyright © 2026 AAML Pennsylvania
.png)
%20(10%20_%2010_cm)%20(15%20_%2010_cm)%20(15%20_%205_cm).png)