Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Anna Joy Eltgroth, Petitioner v. Edward Aaron Pierson

Ftt ft

III

No.

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FILED

SEP 18 2025

supreEmTcTourt:^sK

ANNA JOY ELTGROTH - PETITIONER

Vs.

EDWARD AARON PIERSON - RESPONDANT

v

ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO

APPEAL THE ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 13 MM 2025 of JUNE 26 2025

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI

ANNAJOYELTG

4760 ROBIN STREET

COPLAY, PA 18037

610-790-3380

RECEIVED

SEP 2 3 2025

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

1) Does the only modernly developed 1994 PA Protection from Abuse Act constitute a

serious enough civil matter to warrant a consideration of specific extensions of 6th and

14th amendment rights?

2) Do victims of false accusations of abuse, and in particular, false protection from Abuse

Orders, have the right to an adequate defense in the form of a lawyer if one cannot be

afforded (or if such funds cannot be timely acquired by a defendant financially

dependent upon the plaintiff, without breaking the terms of the temporary immediate

PFA, and so risking false imprisonment)

3) Do individuals with disabilities, and in particular those with high functioning autism,

have the right to appropriate accommodations (listed below), if they are forced to

represent themselves in the court of law?

r

i

i

LIST OF PARTIES

(x) All Parties appear in the caption of the case on the cover sheet

RELATED CASES

EDWARD A PIERSON VS. ANNA JOY ELTGROTH,

(IN THE SCHUYLKILL COUNTY COURT OF COMMONS PLEAS)

No. S-786-24

(Divorce proceeding filed immediately following the PFA order)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

OPIONS BELOW.....................................................................................................1

JURISTICTION........................................................................................................ 2

CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS INCLUDED......................................3

STATEMENT OF THE CASE........................................................................................ 4-6

REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT......................................................................... 7-10

CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................. 11

INDEX TO APPENDICES

VOLT.

APPENDIX A- ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PA

APPENDIX B- ORDER OF THE PENNSYLVANIA SUPERIOR COURT of PA

.SLi^PPENDIX C- REPRODUCED RECORD/ ORIGIONAL TRANSCRIPT OF THE APPELLANT

APPENDIX D- PHYSICIAN OF APPELLANT'S LETTER/REPORT

VOL II,

SbALglWW)

AFFEHW c- HEflWTJVtED RRoM>/oM<3W^'rWJSc’!4pT’

THfe weuMT

I

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CITED

CASES

page number

Gideon V. Wainwright (1963)................................................................................................. 7

Olmstead v. LC (1999)............................................................................................................. 9

PGA Tour, Inc V. Martin (2001)............................................................................................... 9

STATUTESAND RULES

23 Pa C.S.' 6101 Protection from Abuse Act....................................................................... 8

PA ACT 85-1994 Domestic Relations Code Omnibus Amendments................................... 8

42 U.S.C 12131 et seq. (ADA-Americans with disabilities Act of 1990)............................. 9

OTHER

6th Amendment of the US Constitution................................................................................ 7

14th Amendment of the US Constitution, section 1........................................................... 3

p«je I

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Petitioner respectfully prays that a writ of certiorari issue to review the judgement below.

OPINIONS BELOW

For Cases from State Courts:

The opinion of the highest state court to review the merits appears as Appendix A to the

petition and is reported by the PENNSYLVANIA SUPREME COURT 13 MM 2025 published on

public record.

The opinion of the PENNSYLVANIA SUPERIOR COURT 618 MDA 2024 appears as appendix B to

the petition and is reported on public record.

The opinion of the Schuylkill County Court of Common Pleas appears as appendix C to the

petition and is unpublished.

JURISTICTION

For Cases from State Courts:

The date on which the highest state court decided my case was JUNE 26 2025. A copy of that

decision appears as appendix A

The Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked under 28 U.S.C. 1257(a)

CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED

Amendment VI of the U.S Constitution

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an

impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which

district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and

cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory

process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his

defense.

Amendment 14 of the U.S Constitution, Section 1

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are

citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce

any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor

shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor

deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE:

Edward Pierson requested an emergency temporary PFA order on April 22 2024 (see exhibit c)

He did not wish to have any of the normal provision included, but ONLY that the Court order

that he not be allowed to be alone with the defendant while at the same time continue to

reside with the defendant in their jointly owned residence.

Anna Eltgroth, while still undergoing outpatient hospital treatment for PTSD, was served with

the Temporary PFA Order by the Lehigh County Sheriff on the 28th of April. Anna was instructed

by the Sheriff to avoid her residence and all contactjncluding 3rd party contact^to be sure not to

break the temporary PFA order.

Anna was financially dependent upon the pkw/yfiff and was unable to contact him regarding

funds to aquire a private lawyer (which is the only option for a defendant in a PFA in

Pennsylvania). Anna was unable to find support through victims of domestic abuse due to the

fact that the manner in which she was being abused (by false accusation of abuse) rendered

her inelligle for any help due to the fact that she was documented as an "abuser" on paper.

Despite having many individuals helping her search for legal options, no options were found for

an individual who was the defendant in a PFA Case in PA except for a non -legal "Advocate" who

could stand next to her, but say nothing.

Anna had never set foot in a court before and had an entirely clean record, without even a

speeding or parking ticket. She not been made aware of her options either by the court or by

the opposing Plaintiffs Lawyer. She was not aware she had the right to a continuance, nor even

knew what one was.

S

She had been offered no other options by the plaintiff's Lawyer but to accept a settlement of a

one year PFA where she would continue to reside in the same house as the plaintiff but "not be

allowed to be alone together".

She thought she had adequate evidence and was not aware that if she represented herself she

ran the risk of having critical witnesses and evidence dismissed.

She was also not aware that if she attempted to defend herself and failed that the "PFA found

credible" charge would remain on her PERMANENT PUBLIC RECORD with NO OPTION FOR

FUTURE EXPUNGEMENT, EVER. Nor was she aware of just how difficult it would be to defend

herself against the plaintiff armed with a private lawyer. This lawyer would refuse to represent

her client in the appeal and he would therefore proceed pro se.

fyrtnA was never made aware that within 2 weeks she had the right to request a rehearing so as to

*“ present the missing evidence with the help of a lawyer she only then had available.

She was not

aware of how difficult it would be to appeal a case in which adequate

evidence was not allowed to be presented at the trial level and therefore not allowed to be

added in the appeal process.

This led to a confusion and inadequate information on which not only was the PFA awarded on

May 3 2024 for a period of 3 months, but led to a later denial of appeal by the superior court

(found in Appendix B) was publicly published and is the first item found on the internet when

the defendants name in searched (effecting future employment opportunities). Much greater

further Distress was imposed upon the defendant as a result of this flawed public ruling.

Anna was not made aware by her later secured counsel on appeal of the need to proceed within

30 days after the superior courts ruling, nor was able to meet with him (due to his heavy court

duties as Master of Divorce for the Schulkill county court) until after the 30 days had passed.

(see exhibit A)

It took a significant period of time for Anna to research and prepare the appeal to the Supreme

Court of PA, as her lawyer would not represent her until such time as the case were to be

remanded back to the local court.

In addition to having to borrow funds to cover a lawyer to appeal, she also was forced to pay

out of pocket for a divorce lawyer that otherwise would have been provided for free through

the office of resources for victims of domestic abuse, but as a individual listed as the defendant

of a PFA, she was automatically made ineligible.

Anna Prepared a letter from her doctor (see exhibit D) in preparation for hearing by the PA

Supreme Court.

Anna's Appeal was denied hearing on June 26th, 2025 (see exhibit A)

faje. 7

REASONS FOR GRANTING THE PETITION

In Gideon vs. Wainwright, Gideon was denied the assistance of a lawyer in defense of a felony

charge. At the time the state of Florida only guaranteed representation in capital matters. Upon

being granted this right by judgement of the Supreme Court of the United States, Gideon was

retried with the assistance of a lawyer, and remitted off all charges.

The Sixth Amendment of the Constitution guarantees citizens:

"A compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel

for his defense"

It can be argued that since it is stated that this pertains to criminal matters that it there by

exclud^the PFA Act as it is of civil jurisdiction and no lawyer or compulsory process from

obtaining witnesses is required to be guaranteed. However several important facts can suggest

otherwise.

If the provision of a lawyer can be expanded from solely capital offense to include felonies, why

can't an only recently developed civil mattei^which in many ways is more serious than a

criminal matter not also be included*

The PFA, not introduced until 1994, long after the founding fatheifhad chance to consider it for

specific inclusion, is a uniquely serious civil matter warrant of exception. It carries the ability to

permanently scar an otherwise blank permanent record and unlike felonies and other criminal

matters, has no option for future expungement from their record, It can place an individual at

great legal and financial disadvantage in later divorce and child custody proceedings,

automatically barring the individual from eligibility for spousal support or alimony as well as

Page 8

eliminating all free resources of legal representation by domestic Abuse support organizations.

It can permanently affect a persons reputation and employability especially in fields such as

child care, victims of abuse support, and education in which the appellant specializes and hopes

to return to working in some day.

It can force an individual to become homeless and isolated from their primary, or other financial

support.

Other damages can also occur such as in this case, the application for autism wavier in Schuylkill

county was interrupted and eventually lost due to loss of residency.

No one should face such possible consequences with no option for legal representation. No one

who is a victim of a false accusation of abuse should have to face their accuser and counsel

alone in a courtroom uninformed, and under severe mental distress. It is not realistically

possible for such individuals to be expected to remain as perfectly calm as they will be expected

to, in order to not be judged unreliable, unclear, and uncredible.

No one should be able to unnecessarily crowd the courts docket with frivolous and false

accusations that harm not only those falsely accused, but steal attention and resources away

from the very individuals the PFA ACT was design to Assure Protection.

The 14th amendment guarantees that liberty and property will not be taken without due

process. These rights were infringed upon when the Court without making the defendant fully

aware of her options, took away her liberty of action for 3 months, placing her in fear of being

without an alibi or witness at every moment and having to avoid travel for fear of accidentally

running into the plaintiff and placing herself in danger of false Imprisonment. These rights were

also infringed upon when she was forced by the court to leave the residence she relied upon

and on which her name appeared on the deed, without due process.

The granting of this petition would result in an important president, allowing representation for

those falsely accused of PFA and prevent further individuals from undue distress, and later

expense of ineffective appeals. It will also serve to lighten the heavy load on the courts docket

that is filled with PFA requests, many of which should have greater incentive never to be filed,

or clearer consequences associated with false accusations.

This issue is wider than just Protection from Abuse order. It also sets president for the

nationwide problem of the misuse of the justice system by the making of false accusations of

abuse in settings within government, education, civil services and the wider society.

Victims of Abuse must be given special protection, but there still must be as in the 14th

amendment, "equal protection under the law". Those who are FALSELY Accused should not

victimized further or have their records unjustly scarred without consequence.

Finally and most importantly this writ should be granted to establish president for individuals

with disabilities, and in particular, high functioning Autism, to be assured adequate and

appropriate accommodation to live as freely and individually as possible in society ( Olmstead v.

LC (1999), PGA Tour, Inc V. Martin (2001).

That appropriate accommodation is suggested as follows (ADA 1990)

When an individual with a disability is served as the defendant in a PFA order, a copy of the

following must be included...

-A clear list of options available to them for legal representation if they cannot afford it.

- A clear list of option for action within the court, explanations of each, clear timelines

for filing and forms included. For example: what a continuance is, and how to file one.

What a rehearing is, and how to apply for one, what is an appeal and how and when to

apply. Etc.

- a clear warning of the dangers of appearing pro se and a list of specific possible

consequences (for example, possible loss of employment, housing, loss of alimony/

spousal support, loss of child custody, barring of ability to present critical witnesses and

evidence. Severe financial losses.

- a clear instruction for how to place on the record/ assure the presentation of witnesses

and critical evidence

Finally, granting this Petition will serve as the only possible way to either dismiss the matter, or

remand it back to the lower court who otherwise may likely not reconsider it. It will give the

appellant ONE well deserved fair chance to present all of her evidence with/

counsel. This is

her right both as an American Citizen and a Person with documented high functioning Autism.

It is the only way to clear a false accusation from the Appellants record for life.

This is especially important considering her desire to reduce her reliance on government

assistance and work in the future doing traveling therapeutic arts workshops in schools and

community organizations. Such work will constantly place her in the predicament of having to

explain why a Protection from abuse order appears on her background check/ permanent

record required to be presented for each workshop.

It will afford her and other like her to be guaranteed the right to effectively present their case

to the lower court with the help of legal counsel and the guarantee of critical witness and

evidence included.

CONCLUSION

The Petition for a writ of certiorari should be granted.

Respectfully submitted,

DATE:

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

No.

ANNA JOY ELTGROTH PETITIONER

VS.

EDWARD AARON PIERSON RESPONDANT

As required by Supreme Court Rule 33.1(h), I certify that the petition for a writ of certiorari

contains 2464 words. Excluding parts of the petition that are exempted by Supreme Court Rule

33.1(d).

I declare under penalty of Perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on Sept 17, 2025