"x x x.
Making the Most of Pretrial Procedures in Child Welfare Cases
Vol 32 No 5
- Are you ever frustrated by last-minute requests for continuances or adjournments on the eve of trial?
- Do you spend the days before trial either rushing to provide promised discoverable material or tracking down requested discovery items from opposing counsel?
- Do you wish attorneys had more time in their busy court schedules to discuss ways to settle dependency cases or to agree on stipulated facts that could save time during TPR trials?
- Have you ever scrambled to reach a client last minute to confirm or even learn what his or her position at trial will be?
Pretrial procedures can go a long way in addressing these concerns common to judges and practitioners in child welfare cases.
Pretrial procedures, such as pretrial hearings and conferences, can bring parties together before a contested trial in a less adversarial setting to discuss possible settlements or engage in early efforts to ensure that trial time is more efficiently spent. Hearings or conferences scheduled before trials
- allow parties to exchange information and discuss possible settlements or stipulations,
- require attorneys to consult with clients and prepare ahead of trial, and
- allow courts to resolve some disputed matters before the trial date.
Regular use of pretrial procedures often reduces the time needed for a contested hearing and provides more opportunity to resolve a child protection case (or at least some elements of a case) through settlement rather than trial.
Pretrial conferences are a routine practice in federal civil matters,[1] and often are outlined in states’ court rules of civil procedure.[2] The use of pretrial procedures in child welfare cases – dependency adjudications, termination of parental rights (TPR) trials, and other hearings – is less uniform across jurisdictions, but the advantages to the practice have long been recognized and recommended.[3] Courts use pretrial procedures at various stages in child welfare proceedings. While proceedings may look different across counties, jurisdictions share similar goals of resolving critical issues earlier and in a less adversarial manner, as well as streamlining and focusing trials.
x x x."
