Committee Summary for House Children and Family Law (04/01/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
Unclear 00:11:48.320 - 9:09:44 AM	General Working Session	Unclear

Unclear: Subcommittee Chair Information Only00:11:48.320 - 9:09:44 AM; The chair opened the subcommittee work session focused on recommendations for the family court, explaining the background of a previous special committee on the family division of the circuit court in New Hampshire. The chair emphasized the collaborative approach of the special committee and its recommendations over the last two years. The request for an extension of the special committee was denied by the Speaker of the House, leading to the formation of a subcommittee on children and family law. The criteria for selecting subcommittee members were outlined as hard work, intelligence, and collaborative skills. Representative Nelson was appointed as the clerk of the subcommittee.
Unclear: Subcommittee Chair Information Only00:13:10.800 - 9:11:06 AM; The chair continued by discussing the subcommittee's operations, indicating that voting might not occur for some time and suggested that the subcommittee work session sheet should only list subcommittee members. The chair referenced previous compelling testimony from Judge Michael Mace on the history of family court and mentioned working with legislative researcher Kristen Grant to identify useful documents for the subcommittee's work.
Unclear: Subcommittee Chair Information Only00:14:33.440 - 9:12:29 AM; The chair further elaborated on the importance of understanding the origin and initial objectives of the family division, suggesting a deep dive into these aspects. The chair mentioned a helpful report from January 15, 1995, co-chaired by Richard Gagaluso and Elizabeth Hagar, which mirrored the findings of the subcommittee's final report, indicating persistent issues within the family court system.
Unclear: Subcommittee Chair Information Only00:15:37.040 - 9:13:33 AM; The chair discussed the public testimony received during the special committee, noting that many complainants wanted their cases relitigated, which the committee could not do. The chair suggested that in many cases, the fault lay with the testifiers themselves. The chair proposed the creation of an introductory booklet in non-technical language for pro se litigants to better understand court procedures and rules of evidence.
Unclear: Subcommittee Chair Information Only00:17:14.319 - 9:15:10 AM; The chair concluded by mentioning ongoing research into how other states handle family court issues, noting that some states do not have a similar system while others do. The chair highlighted the potential for procedural changes in New Hampshire's family court based on consistent findings across multiple reports.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker 1 Information Only00:19:25.520 - 9:17:21 AM; The speaker discussed the differences in family court practices among various states, emphasizing the potential for learning from these differences. They highlighted the need to improve court hearings, suggesting better preparation for pro se litigants and improved understanding of court proceedings as one key area of focus.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker 2 Information Only00:20:13.880 - 9:18:09 AM; The speaker continued the discussion on state practices, focusing on mediation and arbitration. They noted that some states mandate these processes, while others incorporate counseling alongside mediation to resolve issues such as alimony and child custody more equitably. The speaker corrected a previous statement about counseling, admitting they had misspoken earlier but had since confirmed its use in some states.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker 3 Information Only00:20:59.280 - 9:18:55 AM; The speaker elaborated on the role of mediation, arbitration, and counseling in family courts. They shared personal insights on communication in relationships, suggesting that counseling can help manage conflicts. They mentioned a third topic for discussion but noted that the person they were addressing was not present to recall it.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker 4 Information Only00:21:44.799 - 9:19:40 AM; The speaker suggested organizing testimony into three folders based on the topics discussed: court hearings, mediation/arbitration/counseling, and a third unspecified topic. They humorously noted the absence of the court clerk and the organization of the meeting, mentioning handouts and name tags.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker 5 Information Only00:22:35.200 - 9:20:31 AM; The speaker continued with light-hearted banter about organization and an upcoming vacation, expressing jealousy. They mentioned an interruption and referenced a previous presentation by Judge Michael Mace, indicating that a document outlining his testimony was available.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker Information Only00:23:56.039 - 9:21:52 AM; The speaker discussed initial reports on family court issues, noting similarities with a previous special committee's findings. They suggested that certain issues remain problematic and proposed looking into family court examples from other states like West Virginia, South Carolina, Rhode Island, New York, Delaware, and Kentucky. The speaker mentioned their involvement with NCSL and a fellowship in children and family issues, indicating a plan to review these reports over the next few weeks.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker Information Only00:24:41.760 - 9:22:37 AM; The speaker continued discussing the family court reports, emphasizing the diversity in how different states handle family matters. They suggested trying out some approaches from other states and mentioned additional reports that might be relevant to the committee. They also noted logistical issues with document distribution and the volume of reading material.
Unclear: Attorney Erin Kan, Judicial Branch General Counsel Information Only00:28:41.640 - 9:26:37 AM; Attorney Erin Kan introduced herself as the general counsel for the judicial branch and mentioned her upcoming vacation to Cambodia. She introduced Senior Administrator Heather Culp, who is experienced in mediation and has a background in ADR program development and research at Harvard University. Erin Kan highlighted Heather Culp's potential to assist the committee in understanding the mediation program.
Unclear: Heather Culp, Senior Administrator for the Circuit Court Information Only00:29:45.360 - 9:27:41 AM; Heather Culp provided an overview of the ADR programs within the New Hampshire judicial branch, including mediation and arbitration. She discussed the office's responsibilities across the Supreme, Superior, and Circuit Courts, covering over 12 statewide programs. Culp detailed the mediation programs in the family division, including divorce and parenting mediation, and explained the statutory provisions and processes involved. She highlighted the volume of mediation sessions in 2023 and the role of case managers in the process. Culp also addressed the handling of cases involving domestic violence and the options available for mediation in those situations. She concluded by discussing the mediation process for reopened cases and the role of mediators in the court system.
Unclear: Heather Culp, Senior Administrator for the Circuit Court Information Only00:29:45.360 - 9:27:41 AM; Heather Culp continued to provide information on the family court system, particularly focusing on the mediation process. She explained that the current off period for mediation sessions is partly due to the time needed for participants to prepare documents and gather financial information. Culp noted that while they currently have sufficient mediators, the availability of sessions could potentially be improved with more mediators, suggesting a possible reduction from the current 30-45 day period to around 20 days.
Unclear: Representative D Simone Information Only00:52:03.920 - 9:49:59 AM; Representative D Simone inquired about the process when one party withholds financial information during mediation. He asked if mediators recommend bringing the required documents to the next session or if the case goes directly to a judge. This question aimed to clarify the procedural steps and options available to parties during mediation.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker Information Only00:52:52.000 - 9:50:48 AM; The speaker responded to Representative D Simone's question about the process when financial information is withheld during mediation. They explained that mediators can offer another session to exchange documents as required by court rules, or parties can choose to end mediation and proceed to a court hearing. The requirement is for parties to attend the first mediation session, but participation is voluntary. If mediation ends, parties might proceed to a temporary hearing or a scheduling conference depending on the case's stage.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker Information Only00:53:52.400 - 9:51:48 AM; In response to a follow-up question regarding the duration before parties can see a judge after mediation fails due to adversarial behavior, the speaker noted that it varies by location and court availability. They mentioned an average timeframe of 45 to 60 days for urgent matters related to children or property but offered to provide more specific data if required.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker Information Only00:56:17.200 - 9:54:13 AM; The speaker addressed concerns about mediators' subpoena power, clarifying that mediators do not have the authority to order anything or testify in court about mediation sessions. They explained that mediation is confidential, protected by statute 461-A7 and agreements signed by participants. The confidentiality extends to mediators' privilege, preventing them from being compelled to testify about what occurred during mediation.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker Information Only00:58:29.240 - 9:56:25 AM; The speaker discussed the confidentiality and privilege aspects of mediation further, emphasizing that mediators are protected by RSA 328C, managed by the Office of Professional Licensure and Certification (OPLC). They confirmed that mediators have successfully quashed subpoenas in the past, maintaining the confidentiality of mediation proceedings.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker Information Only00:59:28.200 - 9:57:24 AM; In response to a question about whether mediators have ever been compelled to testify despite privilege, the speaker was unaware of any such instances but acknowledged that it might have happened without their knowledge.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker Information Only01:00:48.520 - 9:58:44 AM; The speaker introduced the topic of neutral case evaluation as another form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in family court. They explained that it involves retired judicial officers who facilitate discussions and provide evaluations on potential trial outcomes, which can be particularly helpful when parties are stuck on specific issues. The availability of these sessions is limited due to the reliance on retired judges, and the sessions are typically used toward the end of a case after mediation has been attempted.
Unclear: Representative Nelson Information Only01:03:04.640 - 10:01:00 AM; Representative Nelson sought clarification on whether participants are informed that the neutral case evaluator is a retired judge. The response confirmed that participants sign an agreement form outlining the role of the evaluator.
Unclear: Representative Doneyani Information Only01:03:04.640 - 10:01:00 AM; Representative Doneyani expressed interest in understanding the process further, confirming that neutral case evaluation occurs after mediation but before trial, used to navigate impasses in the case.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:04:42.160 - 10:02:38 AM; The speaker discussed the process following mediation in family court cases, explaining that after mediation, a judge reviews any agreements made and identifies outstanding issues. The judge may schedule a trial or a scheduling conference to outline the issues if a trial is necessary. The option of neutral case evaluation is then provided. The speaker noted that this process is similar to other states but highlighted that New Hampshire uniquely offers these services regardless of socioeconomic status. Neutral case evaluation in New Hampshire uses retired judicial officers, which is different from other states that might use active judges or other forms of arbitration.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:05:51.760 - 10:03:47 AM; The speaker continued to discuss the uniqueness of New Hampshire's ADR programs, emphasizing the use of retired judges for neutral case evaluations, which ensures they will not sit on the case later. The speaker also mentioned that while many states offer family mediation, New Hampshire's family services are less robust but effective within the ADR realm. The speaker briefly touched on a bill that could raise the retirement age to 75, suggesting it might impact the availability of retired judges for neutral case evaluations.
Unclear: Representative Nelson Information Only01:08:41.839 - 10:06:37 AM; Representative Nelson inquired about the clarity of the process for parties involved in family court cases, suggesting a need for a visual flowchart to help parties understand the different stages and who they might encounter at each stage, such as mediators or retired judges for neutral case evaluations.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:09:32.719 - 10:07:28 AM; The speaker responded to Representative Nelson's query, confirming the existence of a first appearance map and video that guide parties through the divorce and parenting case process. The map and video help parties understand the steps and required documents. The speaker appreciated the suggestion to include who the parties might see at each stage and committed to updating the map accordingly.
Unclear: Representative D Simone Information Only01:12:02.760 - 10:09:58 AM; Representative D Simone asked about the documents parties need to prepare before mediation and whether mediators assist in filling out these documents. The response clarified that case managers and mediators can help with document completion, but mediators do so within the context of mediation and not individually with one party.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:12:48.080 - 10:10:44 AM; The speaker provided details on the time required for parties to prepare documents with the help of case managers and mediators. Case manager conferences are scheduled for one to two hours, and mediation sessions are offered in two-hour blocks. The mediator may assist with document completion during these sessions, ensuring both parties are equally supported.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:15:01.440 - 10:12:57 AM; The speaker explained the rationale behind dividing family court sessions into two parts. The first session helps parties understand what additional documents they need, and the time between sessions allows them to gather these documents before the second session.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:16:26.040 - 10:14:22 AM; The speaker responded to a question about case managers and mediators in other court types. They clarified that there are dedicated housing specialists for landlord-tenant cases and dedicated case managers for involuntary emergency admissions, but not for other case types except for divorce and parenting cases.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:17:49.239 - 10:15:45 AM; The speaker discussed the potential space and time constraints if family court processes were to be integrated into regular district courts. They highlighted the current sharing of courthouse spaces between family and district divisions and the scheduling challenges for mediation.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:20:10.719 - 10:18:06 AM; The speaker continued discussing courthouse space utilization, noting that superior courts have juries which require specific space, unlike circuit courts. They pondered the logistical changes if family court were abolished, including potential space and accessibility issues.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:21:21.040 - 10:19:17 AM; The speaker mentioned the hypothetical scenario of abolishing family court and its implications on courthouse locations and accessibility. They clarified that there are 32 circuit court locations compared to 11 superior court locations, potentially affecting travel distances for court users.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:23:29.920 - 10:21:25 AM; The speaker provided statistics on divorce cases without children in 2023, noting that about 68% of these cases resolved without mediation or a hearing. They also detailed the outcomes of cases that did go to mediation, with percentages settling, partially settling, or needing further hearings.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:26:12.239 - 10:24:08 AM; The speaker discussed reasons why some mediated settlements might still require a court hearing, including unclear or unenforceable provisions, insufficient information, and parties having second thoughts after mediation.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:27:24.400 - 10:25:20 AM; The speaker addressed the concept of integrating counseling into family court, mentioning that New Hampshire has not recently considered this but noted other states like Wisconsin have such services. They discussed the impact of federal funding availability on state services.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:30:51.400 - 10:28:47 AM; The speaker responded to questions about the types of cases handled by the family division, including minor guardianships, domestic violence, juvenile cases, and child support matters. They also mentioned a tabled bill (HB 553) related to abuse and neglect definitions.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:33:30.600 - 10:31:26 AM; The speaker discussed the importance of refining definitions of child endangerment in legislation, referencing the tabled HB 553 and the need to prevent tragedies like the Harmony Montgomery case. They emphasized the need for feedback to create effective legislation.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:34:25.600 - 10:32:21 AM; The speaker highlighted the challenges and sincerity of individuals involved in family court cases, noting the difficulty in making decisions that affect children's lives.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:35:17.840 - 10:33:13 AM; The speaker discusses the complexities of living in a gray area regarding family court issues and emphasizes the need for collaborative efforts in legislation. They mention that Representative Nelson is recognized to speak.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:36:07.920 - 10:34:03 AM; The speaker raises a question about the management of complex cases involving both civil and criminal child abuse and endangerment within the same family. They explain that such cases might involve different courts and judges, potentially leading to a lack of direct knowledge between the cases. The importance of parties bringing forward relevant information is highlighted.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:37:08.000 - 10:35:04 AM; The speaker continues discussing the challenges of handling cases across different courts and judges. They mention that judges might not have the whole story of the abuse due to the separation of cases. The role of executive branch agencies in coordinating proceedings is discussed, with a focus on the sequencing of criminal and civil cases based on different case types and emergency needs.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:40:31.520 - 10:38:27 AM; The speaker addresses the issue of judges not being aware of related cases due to large geographic distances between court locations. They mention the challenge of information sharing between different counties and the potential for overlap in executive branch agencies. The example of someone on bail committing another crime in a different location is used to illustrate the problem.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:41:28.239 - 10:39:24 AM; The speaker suggests the possibility of creating a database system where family court judges could cross-reference criminal cases. They mention the legislature's funding of a bail data platform to address similar gaps, acknowledging the challenges with state government computer systems and the competitive bidding process to improve functionality.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:42:38.320 - 10:40:34 AM; The speaker discusses the technological challenges in creating systems for family court cases, noting that the family docket is larger than the criminal docket. They mention the availability of case statistics on the court's website and ethical considerations for judges doing independent research on cases.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:44:45.280 - 10:42:41 AM; The speaker addresses the issue of confidentiality in court cases, explaining that abuse and neglect cases are confidential while domestic violence cases are not. They discuss the potential impact of confidentiality on information sharing between courts and the role of the legislature in making changes to confidentiality rules.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:46:04.400 - 10:44:00 AM; The speaker mentions their role in the DHS oversight committee and their intention to discuss information sharing issues with colleagues. They emphasize the legislature's ability to make changes to information sharing statutes.
Unclear: Representative Markel Information Only01:47:13.040 - 10:45:09 AM; Representative Markel raises the question of potential constitutional issues with consolidating civil and criminal cases. They discuss the different constitutional guarantees in criminal and family law cases and the practical challenges of having different types of counsel for each case type.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:48:11.440 - 10:46:07 AM; The speaker discusses the different constitutional dimensions in criminal and family law cases, highlighting the right to counsel in both but with different training and expertise. They mention the challenges of cross-training public defenders and family law attorneys.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:49:05.920 - 10:47:01 AM; The speaker discusses the possibility of consolidating cases in family treatment court, which takes a holistic approach to handling abuse and neglect cases. They emphasize the importance of understanding the legislative objective behind consolidation and fashioning a solution to achieve that goal.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:51:16.239 - 10:49:12 AM; The speaker discusses the importance of parties raising relevant information in court, such as orders of protection, to ensure that court orders are fashioned around those orders. They contrast the adversarial system in the U.S. with the inquisitorial system in other countries, where courts actively seek information.
Unclear: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:53:14.239 - 10:51:10 AM; The speaker addresses hypothetical situations where individuals fail to mention important information in court. They discuss the reliance on parties to bring forward information beneficial to their case and the challenges of addressing such situations without technological solutions.
Unclear: Representative Markell Information Only01:55:16.719 - 10:53:12 AM; Representative Markell discusses the challenges of criminal orders of protection, bail, and parenting plans. They mention the potential for defendants to be caught in a 'catch-22' situation where criminal bail orders conflict with parenting plans, suggesting that defendants might need to seek modification of bail orders.
Unclear: Representative Dimony Information Only01:56:34.719 - 10:54:30 AM; Representative Dimony asks about the potential for extending the technology being developed for the bail issue to other areas of the court system. They discuss the differences in handling public versus confidential information and the potential cost savings of leveraging existing infrastructure.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker Information Only01:59:17.760 - 10:57:13 AM; The speaker discusses the need to gather more information about technology from a knowledgeable source before sharing it with the committee. They also mention upcoming meetings and the importance of reading the bills in advance. A Republican caucus is scheduled for the following Monday at 7:00 PM. The speaker concludes by offering contact information through Attorney Kan and mentions their upcoming two-week vacation.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker Information Only02:00:43.360 - 10:58:39 AM; The speaker continues discussing their upcoming vacation and the impact of being away for two weeks, contrasting it with a recent short trip to Florida. They express uncertainty about what happens when one is away for an extended period and humorously suggest that life goes on and there will be plenty of work upon their return, particularly with Senate bills.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker Information Only02:01:53.119 - 10:59:49 AM; The speaker concludes the meeting by summarizing the upcoming workload with Senate bills and ends the session on a light note, mentioning the date as April 1st, 2025, and expressing gratitude for attendance at the subcommittee meeting on family court from the Children and Family Law Committee of the House of Representatives of the State of New Hampshire.

Pearson, Mark(Chairman)(R)[B-]2024	Nelson, Jodi(Clerk)(R)[B+]2024	DeSimone, Debra(V Chairman)(R)[A-]2024
McMahon, Charles(R)[A-]2024	Rice, Kimberly(R)[B-]2022	Love, David(R)[A]2024
Korzen, Lori(R)	Georges, Mary(D)	Seidel, Sheila(R)[A-]2024
Raymond, Heather(D)[CT]2024	Gregg, Alicia(D)[CT]2024	Petrigno, Peter(D)[CT]2024
Grossman, Gaby(D)[CT]2024	Levesque, Cassandra (D)[CT]2024	Malone, Amy(D)
Markell, Jay(R)