February 2003

Colorado Bar Association

Family Law Section Executive Council Minutes

Friday, February 21, 2003

Attendees: (* by telephone)

Angela Arkin*               Gretchen Aultman

Kathryn Beck               Mary Jane Cox                 Fran Fontana

Sheila Gutterman        Chris Hardaway              Beth Henson

David Johnson              Steve Lass                        Mark Leonard

David Littman               Ron Litvak                      Catherine Lohman*

Steve McBride               Joan McWilliams           Lesleigh Monahan

Rick Nicoletti                 Dianne Peterson            Dick Rotole                                   

Bonnie Schriner            Kim Willoughby

Visitors:             Melissa McClerkin             Marie Moses

I.           Officer Reports
 

Chair: Lesleigh Monahan:  

The Brown Bag Lunches continue to be successful.  The Larimer County luncheon went well, and Adams County is scheduled for March 10th. 

Family Law Institute wants to run a judicial track, and 30 – 40 judges might attend on Saturday at the Institute.  It was unanimously approved that the Section will donate $2,000 to the Family Law Institute to assist with this judicial track.  The minutes shall reflect that Angie Arkin abstained from this vote.

Update of the Directory of Professionals.   Helen Shreves will take on the task of updating the Directory of Professionals.  Members are requested to get information about recommended professionals to Helen.

Secretary: Bonnie Schriner
 

Teleconference participation.  Attached is a proposed policy for FLS teleconferencing for members outside the Denver metropolitan area.  It was agreed that we would do this for Larimer and El Paso counties for the next luncheon and see how it goes.  We will continue to offer it to the judges.  We will revisit the proposed policy when we see how it goes with Larimer and Colorado Springs.  Steve Lass and Marie Moses said they would help with this project.  It should be a task under the luncheon committee, and Bob Malman will be contacted about picking up this responsibility.

            Teleconferencing for judges cost for January was about $12 per participant line plus $50 for the service, for a total expense of about $160.

            Teleconferencing for Executive Council meetings is approximately $100 per meeting or $900 per year.

Treasurer: Fran Fontana
 

            A copy of the Treasurer’s report is attached.  The Council requested that the report henceforth reflect charges that we know to be outstanding, so that we can have a clear picture of up-to-the-moment balances, knowing certain bills are currently outstanding.  Ron Litvak said that the CBA will be charging the Section an additional $1.50 or more per member per year for the services that CBA provides to the Section.

II.           Committee Reports
 

Commission on Families in the Colorado Courts New Rule 16.3 Draft/Project

(Dave Johnson)

            The newest draft is on the COBar website.  Dave encouraged everyone to respond online.  The Supreme Court Rules Committee meeting is March 28.  Thereafter, he anticipates a final draft to go out for comment, and thereafter action to be taken by the Court.  Dave gave an excellent summary about the proposed rule changes and the current draft. 

            Summary of Discussion:  Rule  16.3 is intended to cover simplified dissolution.  Each district will have its own case management order.  Rule 16.3 will set the minimum standard. 

            Some discussion issues included fiduciary relationship, which Dave noted is already included in rule 26.2  It is intended to assure that people cannot play “hide the ball.”  However, the question was raised about whether or not this changes the lawyer’s duty, particularly to the opposing party. 

            Each party can order a record (tape recording).  Judges who are the trier of fact shall not be settlement judges for the same case, unless the parties agree in writing. 

            Motions practice will remain limited.

            Mandatory disclosures are greatly enlarged in hopes of streamlining the discovery process. 

            The first status conference would be within 50 days of filing.  It was discussed that they will probably need to modify that to match the disclosures having been exchanged prior to the first conference, so that it can made more meaningful.  The Rule would be limited to Title 14 cases.

            An option to withdraw is included, and must be in writing within 20 days from the first conference.  Attorney acknowledgement is controversial.  Decrees will continue to be entered as they are now, and the fact that it can be reopened if there is an undisclosed asset gives teeth to the fiduciary duty.

            Dave Johnson emphasized to the entire membership that this is a draft, and people do need to make comments online, so that everyone can be heard, and a better product made. 

Book Sales (Mark Leonard, Kathryn Beck)

            Anyone who knows of additional places to sell books should let Mark and Kathryn know. 

Newsletter
 

            The next newsletter date is approximately April 1st.  It was agreed that we must have information in the newsletter about the Special Master program forms to be used in the 18th Judicial District Special Master program.  Beth Henson will not be able to continue working on the newsletter after the next issue.  We need some volunteer(s) to help Helen with the newsletter.

Nominating Committee
 

            Steve Lass has this work in-hand.

Mentoring
 

            Several people have been paired with mentees.  Hopefully the referrals will increase.  The Courts have been enthusiastic about this program.

Legislative Committee (Steve Lass, Beth Henson, Dick Rotole, et al.) 

            Angela Arkin abstained from all voting concerning legislation.

            House Bill 1117 concerning renaming restraining orders to “protection orders” includes adults needing protection, and allows for modification or dismissal of restraining orders with notice provisions.  It seems to fix some problems with restraining order statutes – the Council voted to support this bill.

            House Bill 1121 – offers of settlement in civil actions.  This bill would extend offers of settlement to domestic relations cases, and include attorney fees to be awarded if the offer of settlement was higher than the actual trial verdict/judgment.  While some members of the Council thought that there was a need to address issues presented by the offer of settlement bill, this bill was deemed not to be the solution for the problems within domestic relations cases.  The Council voted to oppose the bill.

            House Bill 1198 – mandatory award of attorney fees to prevailing party.  This bill was killed in committee in the Legislature.

            House Bill 1270 – protection of spouses from debt incurred by other spouse.  This bill was withdrawn by its sponsor on February 20, 2003.

            Senate Bill 79 – a substantial bill concerning child support, paternity and related matters.   Extensive discussion was held about this bill. Steve McBride indicated that a large portion of the bill is acceptable, except for the last part on genetic testing of relatives of the potential father and the part providing that the Office of Child Support Enforcement would no longer calculate or attempt to collect interest on child support arrearages.  The Council voted to oppose those two provisions, and also to try to get these two sections of the bill amended or changed.

            House Bill 1150 – prerequisites to divorce.  This bill was pulled in the Legislature.

            Senate Bill 186 – increasing filing fees.  The Council previously voted to support this bill.  It may be enacted without the Governor’s signature. 

            Potential legislation regarding presumptive 50-50 parenting time.  Legislation concerning this bill is probably not going to occur this year.  Nothing has yet been presented about this topic in the Legislature.

              Respectfully submitted,

              Bonnie M. J. Schriner