ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON RULES FOR FAMILY PROCEEDINGS MEETING OCTOBER 30

VERMONT SUPREME COURT
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON RULES FOR FAMILY PROCEEDINGS
AGENDA FOR MEETING OF
October 30, 2026

The Family Rules Committee will meet virtually on TEAMS on October 30, 2026, from 1:30 – 3:00 pm to consider the following agenda:
1. Welcome
2. Approval of draft minutes for the meeting of July 17, 2026.
3. Status of proposed amendments:
a. Amendment to Rule 2 related to the testimony of children. The proposed amendment to Rule 2 (d) requires parties in CHINS and TPR proceedings to provide notice of intent to call a minor child as a fact witness under oath and permits the court to order special arrangements in appropriate circumstances. The rule was promulgated by the Supreme Court on August 18, 2026, effective 1/1/27.
b. Amendment to V.R.F.P. 4.3(b)(2)(C) to resolve inconsistency between the rule and 15 V.S.A. §§ 782 and 783 with respect to the scheduling of wage withholding petitions. The proposed amendment to Rule 4.3(b) strikes paragraph (b)(2) related to procedures for establishing wage withholding of child support and spousal support and replaces it with new paragraphs (2) and (3) describing the procedures under 15 V.S.A. § 782 and § 783, respectively. The rule was promulgated by the Supreme Court on August 18, 2026, effective 1/1/27.
c. Proposal for further amendment to Rule 9(c) related to requests for temporary orders in RFA proceedings. A further revision to Rule 9(c) to clarify that a request for additional information related to a request for an emergency order may be made whenever the information provided is insufficient “to rule on the request” rather than insufficient to “support the issuance of an order” as currently stated. The rule was promulgated by the Supreme Court on August 18, 2026, effective 1/1/27.
d. Applicability of V.R.Cr.P. 41.1 (Non-Testimonial Orders) to Juvenile Proceedings. The Criminal Rules Committee adopted this committee’s recommendations regarding amendments to V.R.Cr.P. 41.1(m) and (n). The rule was promulgated by the Supreme Court on October 6, 2026, effective 1/1/27.
e. Proposal to amend Rule 4.1(a)(2) related to service by OCS: Based on the provisions of Administrative Order No. 50, the Office of Child Support (OCS) is currently permitted to serve a defendant if OCS is providing Title IVD services on the case and is permitted to effectuate service by email in cases where it has obtained a notice of appearance from the defendant where defendant has opted for email service. The proposed rule is out for comment. Comments due on October 20. Judge Kerry-McDonald to report on any comments she may have received. possible vote on whether to request promulgation.
4. Proposal to amend Rule 4.3(a) related to consolidation of Relief from Abuse actions and actions subject to Rule 4.0. After further discussion with the Judiciary’s Trial Court Operations Division, the division has withdrawn its request to amend Rule 4.3(a).
5. Proposal to amend Rule 7(d) related to child witnesses in domestic proceedings: A proposal to add the accommodations listed in the proposed rule for child witnesses in juvenile cases to Rule 7(d) which governs the procedure for child witnesses in proceedings subject to Rule 4 is under consideration by the subcommittee on child witnesses in domestic proceedings (Judge McDonald-Cady, Susan Ellwood, Rachel Streker, Laura Bierly, Nate Hine and Judge Davenport as Reporter). Judge McDonald-Cady to report on subcommittee’s progress. Questions under consideration by the subcommittee for discussion by the full committee: (1) Should there be just one rule about children testifying in domestic and RFA proceedings rather than one for children who are the subject of the proceeding [Rule 7(d)] and a separate rule for children who are not subject of the proceeding [Rule 7.1]; and (2) currently the appointment of a GAL for the child is required in a divorce case, but discretionary in an RFA case – are the two cases that different?
6. Proposal to Amend Rule 9(e) related to the filing of an intent to pursue in RFA proceedings. When a request for an ex-parte RFA order is denied, Rule 9(e) permits a plaintiff to file an intent to pursue the petition and request a final hearing regardless of the reason for the denial. A proposed amendment would preclude the plaintiff from pursuing the petition if the reason for the denial was lack of jurisdiction. The proposal is on the agenda for further discussion.
7. Proposal to amend Rule 1(c) related to the appointment of a guardian ad litem in delinquency proceedings. Rule 1(c) requires the appointment of a guardian ad litem in all delinquency cases whether that be a parent of the juvenile or an independent GAL. Under Rule 6 (a)(1), the role of a guardian ad litem is to act as “an independent parental advisor.” The question under discussion is whether Rule 1(c) should be amended to exempt delinquency cases involving eighteen-year-olds.
8. Proposal to review Family Rules for respectful language: Judge McDonald-Cady to report on progress.
9. New Business:
a. Proposal to amend Rule 9(j) related to limitations on the granting of an order to a defendant in an RFA case. When a defendant in an RFA case seeks an RFA against the plaintiff (reciprocal orders), Rule 9(j) limits the court’s authority to issue an order in the defendant’s case until service on the opposing party is complete and there is notice and opportunity to be heard. The judges are split as to whether this precludes the issuance of an ex parte temporary order in the defendant’s case. Does the rule need further clarification? Judge McDonald-Cady to report.
b. Proposal to further amend Rule 4.1(a)(2)(C), (D), (E) and(F) with respect to service by OCS: Kyle Hatt proposes that the rule for service in Rule 4 cases involving minor children be further amended.
10. Meeting Schedule: Proposed dates for 2027 meetings: January 22, April 30, July 23 and October 22. Committee to vote on schedule for 2027.
11. Adjourn