Skip to main content

MA SJC Rules on Parent Coordinator Orders: Asks Probate Court to make a Rule

By Anonymous
In the case of Bower v. Bournay-Bower, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ruled that Judges in the Probate and Family Court cannot grant a Parent Coordinator binding authority over the objection of one of the parties.  However, the SJC went much further then necessary in order to open the door for what might be the "appropriate circumstances" to order a Parent Coordinator.


In Bower, the SJC summarized the trial judge's order as requiring a parent coordinator to:
"hear the parties' current and future disputes regarding custody and visitation in the first instance, before the parties could file any action regarding these disputes in court. The order also granted the parent coordinator the authority to make binding decisions on matters of custody and visitation and provided that these decisions must be complied with by the parties as if they were court orders unless one of the parties were to go to the court before the decision was to take effect and obtain a contrary order." - Bower
This order was made after multiple cross complaints for contempt were filed regarding the adherence to the parenting plan and legal custody requirements of the parties' divorce judgment.  The SJC recognized the usefulness of parent coordinators, but found that the order in this case "exceeded the bounds of the judge's inherent authority and was so broad in scope that it constitutes an unlawful delegation of judicial authority."

In their discussion, the SJC points out that
"Despite the increasing use of parent coordinators in Massachusetts, the specific functions of a parent coordinator, including the parent coordinator's duties, necessary qualifications, or scope of authority, have not been set forth by statute or court rule. "- Bower
Due to the court's broad inherent equitable powers the SJC did conclude that judges have the authority to appoint parent coordinators in "appropriate circumstances" and indicated some bounds that might be "appropriate":
"Therefore, probate court judges possess the inherent authority to refer parties to a parent coordinator in appropriate circumstances in order to conserve limited judicial resources and aid in the probate court's functioning and capacity to decide cases, or if in the judge's discretion such referral is necessary to ensure the best interests of the children in a divorce- or custody-related proceeding." - Bower
However, this authority must be limited and was exceeded in this case: "A judge's inherent authority does not extend to compelling a party to submit to the binding decision-making authority of a parent
coordinator without that party's consent."

The SJC was also concerned that the order in this case put off a decision on the existing pending contempt complaints and limited the filing of future claims.  Both of these exacerbated the due process concerns.

There is very clear language from the SJC that "a judge in the Probate and Family Court possesses the inherent authority to refer parties to a parent coordinator."  And also that they are not limiting the right of parties to agree to the use of these services.  If there is agreement, then the issue is easy, but even without agreement, the SJC is indicating that parent coordinators may be useful so long as the judge is careful not to give up too much of their own authority.

Therefore, the SJC asks the Probate and Family Court to promulgate a rule governing the appointment of parent coordinators to help ensure appointments address these and other concerns that the court has over training, favoritism in appointments, etc.  While a lengthy decision, Bower finally brings us some clarity on the SJC's position regarding Parent Coordinators.  Now, the Probate and Family Court can give parents even more clarity by creating the Rule the SJC has asked them for.


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the purpose of the Divorce Nisi waiting period?

By
In Massachusetts the statutory waiting period after a Judgment of Divorce and before the divorce becomes final (or absolute) is called the Nisi period. After a divorce case settles or goes to trial, a Judgment of Divorce Nisi will issue and it will become Absolute after a further ninety (90) days. This waiting period serves the purpose of allowing parties to change their mind before the divorce becomes final. If the Judgment of Divorce Nisi has issued but not become final yet, and you and your spouse decide you don't want to get divorced, then you can file a Motion to Dismiss and the Judgment will be undone. Although many of my clients who are getting divorced think the idea of getting back together with their ex sounds crazy, I have had cases where this happened. In addition to offering a grace period to change your mind, the Nisi period has three other legal effects: 1. The most obvious effect of the waiting period is that you cannot remarry during the Nisi period, be...
76 comments
Read more

2024 U.S. Presidential Party Platforms - What are the policy positions that could affect families?

By
While the laws that affect family formation, marriage and divorce are often made at the state level, there are also many policies and laws at the federal level that affect families and children.  Just some examples from recent years that have impacted families in my mediation practice include changes to the federal tax laws (such as  the elimination of the alimony tax deduction ) and U.S. Supreme Court rulings on same sex marriage and reproductive health rights.  In just over a month, the United States presidential election will have a significant impact on these federal policies going forward, and could choose the next appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court as well. In 2016 and 2020 we shared what each presidential platform said about families and policy regarding family formation and dissolution, and below we'll provide you an update on the 2024 presidential platforms.  As Maya Angelou said, "When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time."...
1 comment
Read more

Updating your Divorce Agreement Template - More Lessons from Cavanagh v. Cavanagh

By
We recently posted a lengthy review of the the Massachusetts SJC decision in Cavanagh v. Cavanagh (2002)  which included some recommendations for drafting divorce agreements, also typically called Separation Agreements.  The Cavanagh case is best known for it's clarification of how the courts should evaluate support calculations when a case may have both alimony and child support.  However, the case also contained numerous rulings that should make practitioners review their Separation Agreement templates and change some of the ways in which they may have previously drafted certain sections. In this post we'll share actual language from the Gray Jay Endeavors, LLC form Separation Agreement template which addresses each of the issues raised by the Cavanagh decision.  If you are a professional interested in purchasing the full Separation Agreement template, check out Gray Jay's  forms subscription which includes editable Massachusetts court forms and financial st...
Post a Comment
Read more