Private Judicial Officers in Family Law

With congested court calendars in most family law courtrooms, parties are increasingly turning to private judicial officers (typically retired from the bench). This option is being selected for both ADR/mediation settings and for contested hearings. Corporate litigants in civil lawsuits have been using these methods for some time. Over the past six years, however, family law attorneys and parties have been increasingly drawn to this forum for dispute resolution.

Consumers in family law matters, particularly in complex custody and property matters, are finding that it is "cheaper" to pay a private judge than to be at the mercy of uncertain and delayed trial calendars, which force lawyers and parties to continuously "re-prepare" for hearings that wind up not taking place or taking place many months, even years after operative events have taken place.

In determining whether a private judicial officers is a worthy option for your matter, ask the following questions:

1. Are any of the litigants out of state residents?

2. Are there issues in the dispute that might be better served in a "non-public", less sensitive arena?

3. Are there adequate resources for one or both parties to pay for the retired bench officer AND the lawyers?

4. Will the agreement to appoint the private judicial officer include a reservation of discovery and/or appellate rights you would have in any other matter?

5. How many hearing prior to the contested trial do you anticipate there will be?

There is no magic answer, and each marital dispute raises different concerns. You should  weigh the various options, and make the best informed decision you can make.

Article Submitted By: Attorney Daniel Gold