Bloise, C. v. Dadey, C.

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedJuly 3, 2025
Docket1582 WDA 2024
StatusUnpublished

This text of Bloise, C. v. Dadey, C. (Bloise, C. v. Dadey, C.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bloise, C. v. Dadey, C., (Pa. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

J-A13022-25

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37

CARMINE BLOISE, JR. : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA Appellant : : : v. : : : CHRISTINA DADEY : No. 1582 WDA 2024

Appeal from the Order Entered November 20, 2024 In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County Civil Division at No(s): Case No. FD-22-001447-007

BEFORE: BOWES, J., OLSON, J., and BENDER, P.J.E.

MEMORANDUM BY OLSON, J.: FILED: July 3, 2025

Appellant, Carmine Bloise, Jr. (“Father”), appeals pro se from the child

custody order entered on November 20, 2024. We affirm.

Christina Dadey (“Mother”) and Father are the parents of A.B. (“Child”),

who was born in March 2019.1 On June 8, 2023, Father filed the initial

complaint in this child custody action, where he sought shared physical and

legal custody of Child. Child Custody Complaint, 6/8/23, at 1-4. The

complaint was served on Mother and, on June 22, 2023, counsel entered their

appearance on Mother’s behalf. See Praecipe for Appearance, 6/22/23, at 1.

Following service of the complaint, the trial court entered several interim

custody orders in the matter, declaring that: the parties shared legal custody

of Child, Mother had primary physical custody of Child, and Father had partial ____________________________________________

1 Child was born out of wedlock. J-A13022-25

physical custody of Child. See Trial Court Order, 6/27/23, at 1-2; Trial Court

Order, 9/14/23, at 1; Interim Consent Order, 12/28/23, at 1-4; Trial Court

Order, 3/26/24, at 1.

By order entered October 7, 2024, the trial court scheduled a custody

hearing for November 20, 2024. Trial Court Order, 10/7/24, at 1.

On November 12, 2024, Father filed a “Motion to Withdraw Case Without

Prejudice,” where he sought trial court permission to withdraw his child

custody action without prejudice. Father’s Motion to Withdraw, 11/12/24, at

1-4. Further, on the day of the hearing, Father filed a “Praecipe to

Discontinue” the child custody action. Father’s Praecipe to Discontinue,

11/20/24, at 1-2. The trial court did not grant Father’s motion and did not

grant Father leave to discontinue the action. See Pa.R.C.P. 1915.3-1(b)(2)

(“[a] custody action cannot be discontinued after the complaint has been

served except (A) by leave of court after notice to the non-moving party, or

(B) by written agreement of the parties”).

The trial court held the custody hearing on the scheduled date of

November 20, 2024. Father did not, however, appear for this hearing.

During the hearing, Mother testified that she is a middle school English

teacher and Father is “self-employed as an independent contractor working

on projects and directing and editing videos.” N.T. Hearing, 11/20/24, at 8.

Mother agreed that the following recitation of the facts as set forth on the

record by Mother’s counsel was a correct summary of her testimony:

-2- J-A13022-25

The parties met in January of 2018. Mother became pregnant. Subsequently the parties began living with one another in August of 2019 where they also share[d] their residence with [J.B.], [Father’s] other daughter from a prior relationship. [J.B. is now eight years old].

The longer that [Mother] was living with [Father,] she began noticing emotionally abusive behavior, including controlling, erratic and unstable actions. Unfortunately this did escalate to physical abuse which included pushing, shoving, choking, scratching, refusing to let her leave the residence without his permission and the like. Despite this abuse [Mother] did try to work with [Father] and go through couple’s therapy.

On July 29, 2022, after a very intense argument with [Father], it resulted in him choking and shoving [Mother]. And at that point in time she realized that she needed to end the relationship. Following this argument[, Mother] went to a family vacation with both [Child] and her half-sister [J.B.]. Mother and [Father] had agreed [Father] was to move out of the residence when [Mother] had returned from vacation. On August 6, 2022[, Mother] did return from the vacation with both children.

...

Now, so [Mother] eventually did drive to the residence following this vacation to see if [Father] had moved out. Initially she believed him to have been gone, but he was actually hiding down the block in his car. When she approached the residence, [Father] did open the door, grab [Mother, and] forcibly pulled her inside. There was an immediate struggle. Father grabbed [Mother’s] cell phone from her hand to prevent her from calling for help. She was stuck in there with him for approximately three hours as he was trying to or as he was threatening to kill himself and also threatened [Mother] with violence, which he ultimately followed through with when she tried leaving the residence. At that point he did push her to the bed and with a closed-fisted hand, punched her in the head. Eventually [Father] did give [Mother] her phone back and she was able to leave the residence.

-3- J-A13022-25

Mother did have to seek urgent medical attention at Med Express after being hit by [Father] a number of times, ending in that closed-fisted punch, and she was diagnosed with a left ruptured eardrum, and [Father] also admitted to this incident, in hitting [Mother], in his psychosocial report as well.

So on August 8, 2022[, Mother] did file a PFA, Protection from Abuse [petition]. A Temporary PFA Order was entered the same day evicting [Father] from the residence and awarding [Mother] primary physical custody of [Child] subject to [Father’s] supervised partial custody – physical custody. A Final Order was later entered on August 18 by consent of the parties granting [Father] partial physical custody of [Child] once he obtained his own residence. It was explicitly clear that he was not supposed to contact [Mother] directly or indirectly, not abuse, stalk, harass or attempt to threaten physical force against her.

For approximately seven months following this PFA [Mother] primarily took care of both [Child and J.B.], whom she has no legal rights or custody over. That was from August of 2022 through March of 2023. Over that seven-month period [Father] left both children with [Mother], and over that period of time [Mother] alleges he only visited approximately five times over that seven-month period for both of his children.

Father later violated that PFA Order for the first time causing an [indirect criminal contempt (“ICC”)] complaint to be filed on October 22, 2022. It was during a custody exchange. Father argued with [Mother], forcibly pushed himself past her to enter the residence and began video-recording her, refusing to leave. . . . I should specify during that incident he did not leave for two hours and left after he was ready to do so.

On November 2, 2022, a general continuance order was entered extending the Final PFA Order until August 8, 2025. Father was provided with partial custody of [Child] every other weekend at that time.

-4- J-A13022-25

Father violated the PFA for a second time prompting an ICC complaint on April 17, 2023 where he was essentially stalking [Mother] and outside of [Mother’s] residence knocking on the door, repeating, [“Answer the door, I can see you.”] This interaction was actually caught on video, which the reporting officer viewed. Mother did not immediately report this due to [Father’s] intimidation.

Father eventually did file his custody complaint on June 8, 2023. Father sought shared legal and physical custody of [Child]. It was noted that he was presently living with [J.B.] and his roommate, Guy R. Jordan, Jr.

On June 26, 2023 an order . . .

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

G.B. v. M.M.B.
670 A.2d 714 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Bloise, C. v. Dadey, C., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bloise-c-v-dadey-c-pasuperct-2025.