This is a status report provided by the New Jersey State Bar Association on recently passed and pending legislation, regulations, gubernatorial nominations and/or appointments of interest to lawyers, as well as the involvement of the NJSBA as amicus in appellate court matters. To learn more, visit njsba.com.
The New Jersey State Bar Association lauded a report from the state Supreme Court’s Special Committee on the Non-Dissolution Docket recommending putting litigants who seek relief for things other than divorce and dissolution (FD Docket) with those who do (FM Docket). The NJSBA called the report a “tremendous effort” that offered recommendations “designed to eliminate the disparity that presently exists between how matters are handled” in FD and FM dockets. The NJSBA had offered recommendations for amendments, but overall supported the committee’s recommendations to be implemented in the court rules.
In its report, the committee made 13 recommendations with an aim toward “reviewing operations, procedures, and protocols to enhance the administration of justice, procedural fairness, and public confidence.” All but one of those recommendations has been approved with some refinements to be implemented in proposed amendments to the court rules, which will be published for review and comment in the future.
The committee’s recommendations include:
- Amending R. 5:4-4 to require the court to serve all non-dissolution documents filed by the initiating party on the non-filing party and to serve any responsive documents on the initiating party. Additionally, it recommended providing an option to use email service for the exchange of documents beyond initial service.
- Currently, the Court sends a court-generated notice of the hearing date and time to the non-filing party, but that party does not receive a copy of the documents filed by the initiating party. This recommendation creates “a more equitable start to the matter” to address claims early and creates a more efficient process, said the committee in its report. The Court approved the recommendation with a note to explore options for email service.
- In addition, the Court recommended developing potential amendments to the court rules to allow the non-filing party to file a responsive pleading and to require the Judiciary to provide a copy of filings to the filing party when filing is done with staff assistance.
- Make non-dissolution materials and forms available in all high-demand languages as provided by the Judiciary, as well as Hindi. Currently, the courts provide many documents in Spanish, Haitian Creole, Korean, Portuguese and Polish.
- Provide educational materials for non-dissolution litigants that inform them of court processes and expectations, such as burdens of proof regarding best interest factors, change of circumstances, complex track, and the like. The committee further recommended this information be provided in all formats including educational seminars in the Offices of the Ombudsman and on the Judiciary website.
- Develop non-dissolution educational materials for judges such as a bench card with factors to be considered when determining whether a case is complex. The bench card should contain the same information offered to litigants.
- Develop sample custody and parenting time/visitation interrogatories that would be available, but not mandatory to the public and modifiable for individual use.
- Recommend R. 5:8 to require non-dissolution litigants to participate in the Non-Dissolution Education Program and a subsequent consent conference prior to a first hearing before a judge as set forth in Directive #02-20.
- Amend R. 5:4-3(b) to allow the non-filing party to file a responsive pleading. Create a timeframe to file a responsive pleading and a timeframe to reply to the responsive pleading and develop sample forms.
- Revise the Non-Dissolution Complex Case Management Order to reflect that an FD Case Management Order was entered at the initial hearing, the reason(s) the court has deemed the case complex, the appointment for a guardian ad litem for the child(ren), if necessary, and the appointment of counsel for the child(ren), if necessary. The NJSBA recommended that the form should be completed at the initial hearing in all of non-summary meetings regardless of whether the case is deemed complex. This recommendation is meant to avoid reinforcing a difference between FD and FM dockets and furthers the stated purpose of the committee’s recommendation that FD actions should not be automatically treated as a summary action requiring expedited resolution.
- Cases designated as complex should be relieved of the 90-day resolution expectation. The Court further refined this recommendation to provisionally relieve cases designated as complex from the 90-day resolution expectation while additional data is collected.
- Amend R. 5:6A and Appendix IX-A, paragraph 28, to require that the child support guidelines worksheet be included/distributed with all child support orders and Uniform Summary Support Orders.
- Revise the Financial Statement for Summary Support Actions to require the information on each line item of the Child Support Guidelines Worksheets.
- Amend R. 5:5-3 to create a process comparable to the dissolution process outlined in R. 5:5-4(a)(4), where a party seeking a modification of support must file a current Family Part Case Information Statement along with a prior Family Part Case Information statement to enable the judge to determine whether there is a substantial change in circumstances warranting a modification of support. The NJSBA further commented that the reference to either a current financial statement or Family Part Case Information Statement in the proposed change could be confusing and recommended that to keep FDs and FMs on par with each other, they both require that a Family Part Case Information Statement be submitted for both dockets when seeking to establish or modify support.
A future notice to the bar will be issued by the Court to request public comment on these proposed amendments once they have been developed.