Rule 91.6.Orders that Affect Parenting Orders

Rule 91.6 solves a jurisdictional collision. It was added August 25, 2021, effective January 1, 2022, and it is the newest rule in Part XI.

The problem

A justice or municipal court -- a court of limited jurisdiction -- issues an injunction against harassment. That injunction bars contact. But the same person holds parenting time under a superior court order, and the two cannot both be obeyed. Neither court entered the other's order, and neither can simply override it.

The petition

The affected party may petition for relief in the family court cause number. The petition must comply with Rule 91, must state that relief is requested under this rule, and must state the details demonstrating that the injunction affects the party's parenting rights. Unless the court specifically orders otherwise, no disclosures are required before the hearing -- the only place in Part XI where that is true, because the conflict between two orders is apparent from the orders themselves.

What the superior court can do

If it finds the injunction is affecting parenting rights, it may:

• direct the limited jurisdiction court to transfer the order to the superior court under a superior court cause number;
• join any third party to the injunction into the proceeding -- but only in a newly assigned cause number and not as a party in the family court case;
• schedule a concurrent proceeding between the matters;
• direct that notice be given to the third party of any hearing on the injunction;
• conduct such proceedings as necessary to reconcile the orders; or
• modify the orders as deemed appropriate.

The joinder limit is the careful part. A harassment injunction often involves someone outside the family -- a new partner, a relative, a neighbor. Rule 91.6(c)(2) lets the court reach that person to resolve the conflict while keeping them out of the family law case itself, so a custody or support matter does not acquire a stranger as a party.