§ 19-9-97.Recovering expenses of district attorney and law enforcement
Chapter 9. Child Custody Proceedings · Article 3. Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act · Part 3. Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Foreign Decrees · Last amended 2001 · Last verified October 9, 2026
Full Text of § 19-9-97
Plain-English Summary
When a district attorney steps in under § 19-9-95 and officers help under § 19-9-96, public money gets spent. This section lets the court shift that cost to the respondent. If the respondent is not the prevailing party, the court may assess against the respondent all direct expenses and costs incurred by the district attorney and law enforcement officers under those two sections.
Three features matter. The award is discretionary: “may,” not “shall.” It runs only against a respondent who doesn’t prevail. And it reaches “all direct expenses and costs” that the district attorney and officers incurred under §§ 19-9-95 and 19-9-96.
This section stands apart from § 19-9-92, which requires the court to award the prevailing party its own necessary and reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, unless the award would be clearly inappropriate. A losing respondent can face both: the winner’s expenses under § 19-9-92 and the public officers’ direct expenses under this section.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I be charged for the district attorney’s costs in a custody enforcement case?
Is the court required to make the respondent pay public enforcement costs?
No. The section says the court may assess those expenses and costs, which leaves the decision to the judge. It applies only if the respondent is not the prevailing party. That differs from § 19-9-92, which says the court shall award the prevailing party its own expenses unless the award would be clearly inappropriate.
What costs can the court shift to the respondent under this section?
Can a respondent who loses pay both the other parent’s fees and the government’s costs?
Yes, both are possible. Section 19-9-92 requires the court to award the prevailing party its necessary and reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, unless the award would be clearly inappropriate. This section separately allows the court to charge a losing respondent with the district attorney’s and officers’ direct expenses.
Does the petitioner ever pay the district attorney’s costs under this section?
Not under this section. It allows the district attorney’s and officers’ direct expenses and costs to be assessed only against the respondent, and only if the respondent is not the prevailing party. It says nothing about charging the petitioner with those public costs.
Amendment History
Laws 2001, p. 129, § 1.