Amendments to the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure

746 So. 2d 1073, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 60, 1999 Fla. LEXIS 80, 1999 WL 42024
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJanuary 28, 1999
DocketNo. 89,955
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 746 So. 2d 1073 (Amendments to the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Amendments to the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure, 746 So. 2d 1073, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 60, 1999 Fla. LEXIS 80, 1999 WL 42024 (Fla. 1999).

Opinion

OVERTON, Senior Justice.

On October 29, 1998, this Court issued an opinion modifying a number of the Florida Family Law Rules effective February 1, 1999. See Amendments to Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure, 723 So.2d 208 (Fla.1998). Given the nature of the modifications, we encouraged comments to be filed and we stated that we would review the comments prior to the effective date of the modifications. In this opinion, we address the comments that were filed and we again modify the rules consistent with many of the recommendations outlined in the comments.

RULES 2.051 AND 12.400 — CONFIDENTIALITY OF RECORDS AND PROCEEDINGS

The Florida Department of Revenue has applauded this Court’s findings regarding the presumption of openness of records in family law cases. However, the department notes that federal law directs states to enact laws requiring the recording of social security numbers for use in certain family law matters and that such information should always be sealed because federal and state law require that it be kept confidential. To that end, the department recommends that we amend Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.051(c)(7) to provide for the sealing of “all records made confidential under the Florida and United States Constitutions and Florida and federal law.” We adopt this recommendation.

RULE 12.365-EXPERT WITNESSES

In our October 29 opinion, we adopted Florida Family Law Rule 12.365 entitled “Expert Witnesses.” The rule governs the appointment of experts by the court and was adopted to clarify confusion regarding deposing expert witnesses and to assist in reducing costs. A number of circuit judges filed comments pointing out problems with the rule. The judges note potential problems involving statutory conflicts, the need for pretrial disclosure in certain circumstances, changes in expert opinions before trial, and unnecessary expenses that would be incurred for experts when cases settle. We find the comments to have merit, and we have amended the rule accordingly.

[1074]*1074RULE 12.610 — INJUNCTIONS FOR DOMESTIC AND REPEAT VIOLENCE

We received a number-of comments requesting that requests for modifications of injunctions in domestic and repeat violence cases be made by motion rather than supplemental petition and that service of such motions to modify be made by mail rather than by personal service. After further consideration, we agree we those recommendations. However, we conclude that, when the nonmoving party is not represented by an attorney, service must be in accord with rule 12.070 or the moving party must file with the court proof that the nonmoving party personally received a copy of the motion.

RULE 12.615 — CIVIL CONTEMPT

The new rule governing civil contempt in family law cases generated the most comments. Almost all comments favored adoption of the rule but a number of clarifying modifications were proposed. In sum, the comments requested that (1) the rule allow for compensatory fines; (2) the notice requirement be amended to correspond to the statute; (3) the finding of contempt as to willful failure to pay support and the finding for an appropriate purge of that contempt be based on the present ability to pay; (4) the term “immediately brought before the court” be defined; (5) the statutory presumption of ability to pay be incorporated into the rule; (6) when incarceration is deferred to allow for a purge, the movant be required to file an affidavit of noncompliance to allow for issuance of a writ of bodily attachment; (7) a purge amount be set by the court before a writ of bodily attachment is issued; (8) a second hearing not be required when the deferral of incarceration is only for a forty-eight hour period of time; (9) because a writ of bodily attachment is not always required when a contemnor fails to appear, the issuance of such a writ be discretionary rather than mandatory; (10) the rule allow for the granting of any other required relief; (11) the rule direct that the notice of hearing inform the contemnor as to what will occur if the contemnor fails to appear; and (12) the rule be expanded to cover payment of court-ordered attorney’s fees and costs. Some of these suggestions were rejected in our October 29 opinion. Most, however, have merit. Accordingly, we have modified the new rule to incorporate all of the suggestions but items (2), (5), and (12).1 Specifically, as to suggestion (8), we find that a forty-eight-hour deferral of incarceration may be imposed without triggering the need for a second hearing on a contemnor’s present ability to pay. We do so because we agree that a contrary finding will result in a substantial decrease in deferrals, which are designed to serve the interests of all affected parties in these types of proceedings. Notably, as this contempt rule is applied, continued refinement may be required. As such, we will continue to consider comments regarding this rule as the need arises.

MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS

In addition to detailed suggestions regarding changes to the rules, we also received several comments contending that the rules are still too complicated, especially for lower income individuals. As we have stated in prior opinions, we direct the Florida Family Law Rules Committee to continue to work towards simplification of the family law rules.

Accordingly, we adopt the amendments to the rules as set forth in the attached appendix, effective 12:01 a.m., February 1, 1999. The amendments to rules 12.365, 12.610, and 12.615 are shown as changes to those rules as adopted or amended by our opinion of October 29, 1998, even though those changes have not yet taken effect. The amendments adopted on October 29 [1075]*1075that are not affected by the current changes will still take effect on the date stated in the October 29 opinion. See 712 So.2d at 216.

It is so ordered.

HARDING, C.J., SHAW, WELLS, ANSTEAD and PARIENTE, JJ„ and KOGAN, Senior Justice, concur.

APPENDIX

Rule 2.051. Public Access to Judicial Records

(a) Generally. Subject to the rulemak-ing power of the Florida Supreme Court provided by article V, section 2, Florida Constitution, the following rule shall govern public access to the records of the judicial branch of government and its agencies. The public shall have access to all records of the judicial branch of government and its agencies, except as provided below.

(b) Definition. Judicial records for this rule refer to documents, exhibits in the custody of the clerk, papers, letters, maps, books, tapes, photographs, films, recordings, data processing software or other material created by any entity within the judicial branch, regardless of physical form, characteristics, or means of transmission, that are made or received pursuant to court rule, law or ordinance, or in connection with the transaction of official business by any court or court agency.

(c) Exemptions. The following records of the judicial branch and its agencies shall be confidential:

(1)Trial and appellate court memoran-da, drafts of opinions and orders, court conference records, notes, and other written materials of a similar nature prepared by judges or court staff acting on behalf of or at the direction of the court as part of the court’s judicial decision-making process utilized in disposing of cases and controversies before Florida courts unless filed as a part of the court record;

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

Related

Vereen v. Spears
819 So. 2d 923 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Freetly v. Mascolo
757 So. 2d 1286 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
Amendments to the Florida Family Law Forms
759 So. 2d 583 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
746 So. 2d 1073, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 60, 1999 Fla. LEXIS 80, 1999 WL 42024, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/amendments-to-the-florida-family-law-rules-of-procedure-fla-1999.