On April 15, 2008, C. Scott Shields, an attorney with the law firm of Shields & Hoppe, LLP in Media, Delaware County, PA, filed a lawsuit in Philadelphia on behalf of the National Rifle Association and several individuals and gun dealers who are seeking to enjoin enforcement of 5 ordinances signed into law by Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter which unconstitutionally regulate the ownership of firearms within the City of Philadelphia.   “The law is clear that the right to regulate firearms in Pennsylvania rests solely with the State Legislature”, said Attorney Shields.  “Mayor Nutter and City officials know this.  Yet, they passed these unconstitutional ordinances anyway in direct violation of the clearly established rights of the citizens of Philadelphia”, said Shields.   

The lawsuit consists of a Complaint and a Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction seeking to immediately stop any enforcement of these unconstitutional gun control ordinances.  A hearing has been scheduled on the request for the TRO/Injunction for tomorrow, Thursday, April 17, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 426, at City Hall, Philadelphia, PA. 

 ComplaintMotion for Temporary Restraining Order/Preliminary Injunction

In an effort to reduce outstanding child support arrears, PA recently passed a law that requires an individual who receives a personal injury or other similar settlement to pay child support arrears before they receive any of the settlement proceeds.  The individual or their attorney is required to verify whether there are any child support arrears owed and, except in a few limited situations, must pay those arrears from the settlement proceeds.

On April 1, 2008 the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision reinstating the case that Michael Marcavage, the head of Repent America, had brought against the City of Philadelphia for violation of his First Amendment rights.  In 2004, Michael Marcavage filed a lawsuit against the City of Philadelphia alleging that on 7 different ocassions, the City and members of the Philadelphia Police Department had violated his right to free speech and free exercise of his religious faith.  There were also claims for false arrest and malicious prosecution.

A jury trial was held in August, 2006 after which a jury decided in favor of the City Defendants.  Marcavage appealed asserting that the Trial Court had erred in many of the rulings and decisions that it had made including by not properly instructing the jury on the law concerning First Amendment rights.

Oral argument before the Third Circuit Court of Appeals was held on February 5, 2008 in Philadelphia.  The Court has now issued a decision reversing the jury’s verdict and directing that Mr. Marcavage be given a new trial.  Importantly, the Court agreed with Marcavage that the Trial Court had erred in its instructions to the jury concerning First Amendment rights.

Marcavage is represented in this case by Ted Hoppe and C. Scott Shields of the law firm of Shields & Hoppe, LLP located in Media, PA.  The ATtorneys of Shields & Hoppe are allied attorneys of the Alliance Defense Fund.

Decision of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Marcavage v. City of Philadelphia

News Coverage

WorldNetDaily Article

Delaware County Daily Times Article

Philadelphia Daily News

World Net Daily reports that the U.S. State Department has been asked by members of Congress to investigate reports from a former New Jersey police officer that he was jailed on trumped-up charges and tortured in Canada in violation of international treaties that require prisoners be given access to consular services when facing prison in a foreign country.

Requests for an investigation have been submitted to the State Department by U.S. Reps. Steny Hoyer and Rob Andrews on behalf of Scott Loper, who was delivered to the U.S. border by Canadians in 2004 after he served a four-year prison term on charges he believes were manufactured. He is represented by civil rights lawyer C. Scott Shields of Media, Pa.

Shields & Hoppe, LLP

The PA Superior Court recently issued a decision affirming the obligation of parties to a support proceeding to report material changes affecting support. This includes any changes in employment and/or income. When a party fails to report such a change or has made a misrepresentation of their income even by failure to report a change, the Court may enter a modification of the arrears retroactive to the date of the first misrepresentation.

For those who are paying support, this decision affirms the general rule that if you fail to report a change in income, the Court can modify the support order back to the date of the misrepresentation (the change in income) even if that pre-dates the Petition to Modify.

For those who receive support, the decision serves as a reminder that you must promptly act to seek modification of the support order upon learning of the misrepresentation.

Shields & Hoppe, LLP

The PA Senate Judiciary Committee held its first hearing on a proposed amendments to the PA Constitution which would define marriage as being between a man and a woman. The Panel is expected to vote today on whether to send the proposed Amendment to the full Senate for consideration. If approved, the measure would have to be voted on again in 2009 before it could be submitted to the voters for final approval.

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article.

Shields & Hoppe, LLP

As reported in World Net Daily, on October 6, Michael Marcavage, the Director of Repent America, was arrested for preaching on a public sidewalk at the entrance of the Liberty Bell Center near Independent Hall in Philadelphia by National Park Service Rangers.   As Mr. Marcavage talked to those waiting in line to see the Liberty Bell, a Ranger approached him, told him that he could not speak on the public sidewalk and ordered him to go to a “free speech zone” on the other side of the building far away from the people that Mr. Marcavage wanted to speak to.  Watch video.   When Mr. Marcavage asserted his right to speak on the public sidewalk, he was arrested.

This is only the latest in a long list of examples of free speech, and particularly Christian speech, being shut down in the City of Philadelphia.  Shields & Hoppe is vigorously defending Mr. Marcavage  against the meritless charges.  

ESPN is reporting that the NFL has decided to stop harassing churches who want to hold Super Bowl parties.  In recent years, the NFL has beeen “cracking down” on churches who hold Super Bowl parties as an outreach event and show the game on big screen TVs.  As a result, many churches stopped holding the popular events.  Now, however, the NFL has decised to abandon this tactic and to allow the Churches to hold Super Bowl parties and to show the game as long as it is done on c hurch premises.  Congratulations to the NFL for doing the right thing.

Ted Hoppe                                                                                                                                                            www.shieldsandhoppe.com 

PA Governor Ed Rendell has signed a new law making significant changes to Pennsylvania’s Right to Know Law.  PA’s Right to Know Law (PA’s version of the Freedom of Information Act or Open Records law) has lbeen said to be one of the weakest in the country.  However, the changes to the law, which go into effect on January 1, 2009, will make getting access to public records much easier.   Under the new law, all government documents will be presumed to be open unless specifically identified in the law.  It will make it easier and quicker for people to get records and to challenge the denial of a request.  It also increases the penalties for noncompliance.

First Heather has 2 mommies, now Johnny has 3 parents - where will it stop?  Recently, the PA Superior Court was faced with the question of whether a sperm donor may be brought in as a party in a child support case involving the other two “parents”.  The Court said “yes”, creating a situation where the child now has three legal parents.

In this case, (Jacop v. Shultz-Jacob), Jacob entered into a lesbian relationship with Shultz-Jcaob.  They arranged with a sperm donor (Frampton) to contribute sperm so they could have a child.   Frampton actually contributed to 2 children.  Sometime after the children were born, Jacob and Shultz-Jacob went their separate ways.  Not surprisingly, a custody dispute arose.  All 3 parties (Jacob, Shultz-Jacob and Frampton) were given some custody of the children and Shultz-Jacob, but not Frampton was ordered to pay support.

On Appeal, the Superior Court vacated the Trial Court’s decision on support and remanded for the purpose of bringing Frampton into the support proceedings and allocating the support obligation between the 3 “parents”.