Announcements
No greater legal need exists in D.C. than for lawyers to represent those parents, third party caregivers, and immigrants attempting to stabilize and protect their families. And there is possibly no greater professional satisfaction than for a lawyer to make a difference in the life of a family in crisis.
DC's Children's Law Center and the D.C. Bar Pro Bono Center co-host this Practice Area with the generous assistance of DLA Piper.
The Family Law Practice Area provides pro bono, court-appointed and legal services lawyers with the tools necessary to be effective advocates in adoption, custody, divorce, support, and abuse and neglect matters. Volunteer opportunities are available through the co-host organizations, as well as many other legal service agencies in D.C. Most organizations provide training and support (including mentoring), and some provide malpractice insurance.
Join us!
You can join the Family Law Practice Area if you provide pro bono representation through one of the co-host organizations or through one of the other legal service agencies in D.C. Legal service practitioners are also encouraged to join.
New Training Videos
The D.C. Bar Pro Bono Center is proud to share a range of training videos in family law. Please click on the library link.
NEW Video series in family law for pro se litigants:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLuYR90iNpblq_uenVrC9fj6MvT1tjLi3r
NEWS:
New Divorce Laws:
B25-0042 - Grounds for Divorce, Legal Separation, and Annulment Amendment Act of 2023 (dccouncil.gov).
In summary, the Act make three changes:
1. First, and most critically, there are no more waiting periods for divorce, legal separation, or annulment. Parties no longer have to live separate and apart for any amount of time in order to file for divorce, legal separation, or annulment. Instead, either party to a marriage may file and the court may grant the divorce whenever either spouse decides they no longer wish to be married.
2. Second, the court is now required to consider the history of domestic violence, broadly defined, in awarding alimony and allocating marital property. Specifically, the "estrangement" factor is expanded to include consideration of "the history of physical, emotional, or financial abuse by one spouse against the other.” The Council intentionally went beyond the narrower option of limiting consideration to legal findings of "intrafamily offenses."
3. Finally, the court is explicitly authorized to award exclusive use and possession of a marital home during the pendency of a divorce action, irrespective of which party has a property interest in the home. The standard for this PL relief is "as is just, equitable and reasonable after consideration of all relevant factors."
Updates in Paternity:
The DC Council recently enacted changes to DC's parentage laws to make it easier for families to correct paternity determinations that do not align with DNA. These changes -- affecting only parentage established through acknowledgment of paternity (AOP) or adjudication, not marriage or domestic partnerships or artificial reproductive technology -- are now in effect.
The language of the Paternity Establishment Amendment Act of 2022, as passed, is available here: https://code.dccouncil.gov/us/dc/council/laws/24-251#%C2%A72(a).
By way of summary, the changes:
1. Make explicit that an acknowledgment of paternity (AOP) only establishes paternity when all of the statutory requirements are met. When a party challenges an AOP signed in DC and proves that it did not meet all of the requirements, the Court will need to start over with another method of paternity establishment, ideally by ordering court-ordered DNA testing. This may result in evidence that the signatory of the faulty AOP is not the biological father, requiring his removal from the birth certificate.
2. Allow challenges to paternity established by AOP or adjudication at any time. There is no time limit based on the child's age or the time since an AOP or adjudication was signed.
3. Expand standing to file a challenge to paternity established by AOP or adjudication beyond the parties to also include any signatory to an AOP or adjudication, the child at issue, or another individual who puts forth sufficient facts to claim they may be the biological parent of the child.
4. Increase access to court-ordered DNA testing by requiring the court to order DNA upon the request of anyone with standing, even when an AOP was previously signed in DC or paternity was previously adjudicated by a DC court without DNA. The court can order the District to pay the costs of testing if it finds the alleged parent does not have sufficient resources to pay for it.
5. Provide that DNA results excluding a signatory of an AOP or proving someone else's paternity "shall constitute evidence of fraud, duress, or material mistake of fact, and shall require the Court to set aside the AOP."
New Adoptions court rules.
The court has promulgated new Rules Governing Adoption Proceedings. Pursuant to Rule Promulgation order 18-04, the rules will become effective as of January 2, 2019. A copy of the new rules is posted in the Library in the Main Menu folder and is also available on the court's website.
New Domestic Relations and Parentage and Support court rules.
The court promulgated new Rules Governing Domestic Relations Proceedings and Parentage and Support Proceedings. Pursuant to Rule Promulation Order 18-02, the new rules will be effective as of November 26, 2018. A copy of the new rules is posted in the Library in the Main Menu folder and is also available on the court's website.
Family Court is paperless as of January 1, 2018.
Family Court Central Intake Center will scan in your document and return it to you, rather than keeping the original for a paper case file. As most attorneys are filing electronically, you will see no difference in procedures moving forward, this only affects paper filings over the counter. Please note that Adoption cases will still be using paper files and these changes do not apply to Adoption cases.
New D.C. Courts online case information resource
D.C. Superior Court has announced the launch of eAccess on August 11. eAccess will replace Court Cases Online as the court's online source for court records. The system will allow the public to view online the image for some non-confidential court documents. At this time, as with Court Cases Online, information will be available only for Civil Division, Criminal Division (including domestic violence misdemeanors) and Probate Division cases. For an instructional video, click here.
In re Ta.L. Directive
Directive 1-2017, "Procedures for hearings where the Court may remove reunification as a permanency goal and for appeals of such orders," sets forth procedures to be followed in neglect cases for changes of permanency goals from reunification to another goal, in light of the Court of Appeals decision in In re Ta.L. The directive is posted in the Neglect folder.
New Administrative Order for PAC program
Administrative Order 16-3, "Establishing the Program For Agreement and Cooperation" sets forth the protocol for the PAC program (parent education seminar and mediation in contested custody cases and divorce and legal separation cases when custody is a contested issue). The order supersedes Administrative Order 07-06, which originally established PAC as a pilot program. Administrative Order 16-3 is posted in the D.C. Superior Court and Family Court Practice folder and in the Custody folder.
New Court of Appeals cases
Note: if the links are broken, visit the Opinions page on the D.C. Court of Appeals website.
In re Petition of P.D.K.J. (April 26, 2018) (adoption affirmed) (fact that judge presided over Ta.L. hearing and changed permanency goal to adoption not in and of itself a basis for recusal; it was not error for judge to consider testimony heard at the Ta.L. hearing; not error to limit cross-examination regarding petitioner's son; other issues)
In re Sa.C. et al., S.C., Appellant (February 8, 2018) (order denying motions of GAL and government to dismiss the parent's appeal of a "retroactive" Ta.L. permanency goal decision. A permanency goal was changed prior to the Court of Appeals' decision in In re Ta.L. After that decision was handed down, the trial court held a "retroactive Ta.L" hearing regarding that permanency goal change. Citing the "firm rule of retroactivity," the Court of Appeals stated that because the neglect case was still being litigated in the trial court when In re Ta.L. was issued, the trial court properly sought to follow In re Ta.L. in making its decision to change the permanency goal from reunification to adoption.)
J.U. v. J.C.P.C., (Jan. 4, 2018) (Trial court's denial of Special Immigrant Juvenile finding reversed)
In re Petition of J.O. and P.O. (Dec. 12, 2017) (analysis of what constitutes parental "competence" such that the parent's choice of caregivers is entitled to weighty consideration)
Ieasha Hipps v. Ruben Cabrera (September 28, 2017) (interprets "forum non conveniens" provision of the UCCJEA)
A.C. v. N.W. (June 1, 2017) (analysis of pre-trial order vacating order temporarily suspending visitation; burden of proof, sufficiency of the evidence, admissibility of "Safe Shores" testimony)
Fleet v. Fleet (April 20, 2017) (equitable distribution of marital property)
In re Petition of T.G.M. & T.C.M. (March 9, 2017) (granting of foster parent's adoption petition upheld)
Other news
D.C. Code § 13-340(a) has been amended to allow for constructive service by posting in custody cases in addition to service by publication. Previously, constructive service by posting was only permissible in divorce cases. In addition, D.C. Code § 13-336 was amended to allow the court to authorize constructive service on a defendant who cannot be found after diligent efforts or who by concealment seeks to avoid service of process. The amendments are part of the "Comprehensive Youth Justice Amendment Act of 2016," D.C. Act 21-568.
D.C. Superior Court has issued Administrative Order 14-01 (January 29, 2014) adopting practice standards for guardians ad litem in custody cases. The standards can be accessed at http://www.dccourts.gov/internet/legal/dcscadminorders.jsf.
D.C. and Maryland have entered into a border agreement regarding the placement by D.C. in Maryland of children in neglect cases pursuant to the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children. The agreement can be found in the Abuse and Neglect - Statutes, rules and regulations -D.C. statutes - Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children folder.
The Military Parents' Child Custody and Visitation Rights Act of 2012 enacts D.C. § 16-914.02, addressing issues in connection with deploying parents.
The Civil Marriage Dissolution Equality Act of 2012 allows a same-sex spouse to obtain a divorce in D.C. without either spouse being a residence if neither spouse resides in a jurisdiction in which same-sex spouses can obtain a divorce.
D.C. Superior Court has issued Administrative Order 11-17 regarding possession and use of electronic devices in courtrooms. The order is posted on the court's website here.
New D.C. regulations about protecting foster children from identity theft are posted in the Abuse and Neglect - Statutes, rules, regulations folder.
D.C. Superior Court Administrative Orders 11-13 and 11-14, "Procedures for Adjudicating Applications to Amend Birth Certificates" and "Procedures for Adjudicating Applications for Change of Name" were issued on August 4, 2011. Cases involving minors or cases in which the applicant is involved in a pending Family Court case are to be filed in or assigned to Family Court. The full text of Admninistrative Order 11-13 is available here and Administrative Order 11-14 is available here.
D.C. Superior Court Administrative Order 11-15, "Procedures for Stand-in Attorneys Representing Parents in Family Treatment Court," was issued August 4, 2011. A copy of the Administrative Order is posted in the appropriate folders in the Family Law Library and is posted on the court's website here.