| 47 | | - | SECTION 1. The legislature finds that delays experienced by parents and children while awaiting the disposition of appeals from family court decisions could arguably violate the due process clauses of both the state and federal constitutions. These delays conflict with the mission of the family court, which, as stated on the family court's website, is "to provide a fair, speedy, economical, and accessible forum for the resolution of matters involving families and children." The legislature further finds that in recent years, some parents and children have had to wait up to eight years for their cases to be resolved. For example, the delays between the filing of the family court order and the decision by the supreme court on appeal have lasted as long as: (1) Seven years and eight months in Cox v. Cox, 138 Hawaii 476 (2016); (2) Four years and eleven months in Brutsch v. Brutsch, 139 Hawaii 373 (2017); and (3) Two years and six months in Tumaneng v. Tumaneng, 138 Hawaii 468 (2016). Delays can result in unacceptable incongruities if the matter to be decided becomes moot while the appeal is pending, such as when a child reaches the age of majority before the final child custody order makes its way through the appeals process. Therefore, the purpose of this Act is to expedite the disposition of appeals from family court decisions by allowing cases within the jurisdiction of the intermediate appellate court involving a judgment, order, or decree of a family court that affect the custody of a child or minor, including involuntary termination of parental rights, to be transferred to the supreme court. SECTION 2. Section 602-58, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by amending subsection (b) to read as follows: "(b) The supreme court, in a manner and within the time provided by the rules of court, may grant an application to transfer any case within the jurisdiction of the intermediate appellate court to the supreme court upon the grounds that the case involves: (1) A question of first impression or a novel legal question; [or] (2) Issues upon which there is an inconsistency in the decisions of the intermediate appellate court or of the supreme court[.] or (3) A judgment, order, or decree of a family court that affects the custody of a child or minor, including termination of parental rights pursuant to section 571-61(b)." SECTION 3. This Act does not affect rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred, and proceedings that were begun before its effective date. SECTION 4. Statutory material to be repealed is bracketed and stricken. New statutory material is underscored. SECTION 5. This Act shall take effect on December 31, 2050. |
|---|
| 47 | + | SECTION 1. The legislature finds that delays experienced by parents and children while awaiting the disposition of appeals from family court decisions could arguably violate the due process clauses of both the state and federal constitutions. These delays conflict with the mission of the family court, which, as stated on the family court's website, is "to provide a fair, speedy, economical, and accessible forum for the resolution of matters involving families and children." The legislature further finds that in recent years, some parents and children have had to wait up to eight years for their cases to be resolved. For example, the delays between the filing of the family court order and the decision by the supreme court on appeal have lasted as long as: (1) Seven years and eight months in Cox v. Cox, 138 Hawaii 476 (2016); (2) Four years and eleven months in Brutsch v. Brutsch, 139 Hawaii 373 (2017); and (3) Two years and six months in Tumaneng v. Tumaneng, 138 Hawaii 468 (2016). Delays can result in unacceptable incongruities if the matter to be decided becomes moot while the appeal is pending, such as when a child reaches the age of majority before the final child custody order makes its way through the appeals process. Therefore, the purpose of this Act is to expedite the disposition of appeals from family court decision by allowing cases within the jurisdiction of the intermediate appellate court involving a judgment, order, or decree of a family court that affect the custody of a child or minor, including involuntary termination of parental rights, to be transferred to the supreme court. SECTION 2. Section 602-58, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by amending subsection (b) to read as follows: "(b) The supreme court, in a manner and within the time provided by the rules of court, may grant an application to transfer any case within the jurisdiction of the intermediate appellate court to the supreme court upon the grounds that the case involves: (1) A question of first impression or a novel legal question; [or] (2) Issues upon which there is an inconsistency in the decisions of the intermediate appellate court or of the supreme court[.] or (3) A judgment, order, or decree of a family court that affects the custody of a child or minor, including termination of parental rights in respect to a child pursuant to section 571-61(b)." SECTION 3. This Act does not affect rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred, and proceedings that were begun before its effective date. SECTION 5. Statutory material to be repealed is bracketed and stricken. New statutory material is underscored. SECTION 6. This Act shall take effect on December 31, 2050. |
|---|