Amendments to the Florida Family Law Rules (713 So. 2d 1, 1998)

OVERTON, Justice.

In 1990, the legislature established the Commission on Family Courts for the purpose of making recommendations regarding the implementation of the family law divisions. Ch. 90-273, Laws of Fla. After this Court received the commission’s report recommending the implementation of such divisions, this Court established a new process for family law cases by directing that family court divisions be instituted. See In re Report of Com’n on Family Cts., 588 So.2d 586 (Fla.1991). Subsequently, we adopted new rules of procedure for these family law divisions, which were intended to address the unique problems of family law cases. In re Family Law Rules of Procedure, 663 So.2d 1047 (Fla.1995) (Family Law I), and In re Family Law Rules of Procedure, 663 So.2d 1049 (Fla.1995) (Family Law II). In doing so, we included a significant number of forms and instructions.

Because these rules were new, and in some instances appeared to be complicated, we recognized that the rules and forms-would need additional prompt refinement. To address this problem, in Family Law II we directed the Family Law Rules Committee, the Family Courts Steering Committee, and the Supreme Court Mediation and Arbitration Rules Committee to review the rules and forms following their implementation and to make recommendations for changes to the rules and forms. In issuing that directive, we stressed that the committees should place particular emphasis on making revisions to further simplify the family law process, particularly because of the many litigants in family law cases who represent themselves.

The development of common sense rules and forms in family law eases, understandable by both lawyers and pro se litigants alike, is essential. Reports submitted to the Office of State Courts Administrator by the circuits of this state reflect that, on average, sixty-five percent of all family law cases have at least one unrepresented party. Consequently, the rules governing family law cases should be crafted to establish an easy-to-understand process. Unfortunately, in adopting separate family law rules and forms, it appears that we may have complicated rather than simplified the process. One lawyer commenting on the rules stated that they are now so complicated that he has had to substantially increase his fees for dissolution proceedings. Our goal must be to simplify the process. Otherwise, we deny many citizens meaningful and affordable access to the courts, particularly when so many of them are self-represented. Moreover, every litigant in family law eases, whether represented by an attorney or not, is entitled to have contested matters heard by an article V judicial officer. Where custody, property, or liberty is involved, citizens in this state are entitled to a judicial resolution of a dispute, absent a mediated settlement.

In 1997, the rules and steering committees finalized their second review and submitted to us recommended rule and form modifications. The mediation committee found no need to recommend changes to the rules regarding family law mediation at this time. Additionally, in an effort to fulfill the spirit of this Court’s directives to simplify the process of litigation in family law matters, the steering committee completely revised the forms, incorporating instructions for litigants throughout the forms, rather than keeping those instructions in attached appendices. The committee also added a number of new forms to the rules. The proposed amendments and modifications to the rules and forms are extensive; the rules and forms now constitute more than 500 pages.

The proposed rule changes were published for comment in The Florida Bar News, and many comments were received by this Court. We Have now reviewed the proposed changes and the comments. The majority of the proposed changes fall into the following categories: technical revisions to improve or correct the forms and related instructions, domestic and repeat violence, mandatory disclosure, court appointed experts, evaluations of minor children, hearing officers and paternity determinations, motions for new trial and rehearing, civil contempt, and case management and pretrial conferences for adoptions. We adopt, without comment, the majority of technical changes made to the forms and related instructions. Additionally, after having reviewed the forms and related instructions, this Court has made numerous additional technical changes on its own. We address the numerous other issues raised by the proposed changes to the rules and the forms below.

DOMESTIC AND REPEAT VIOLENCE

Both the steering and rules committees have made suggested changes to Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.610, which governs domestic and repeat violence, and the forms related to that rule. Some of the reeonamended changes were necessitated by recent changes to the statutes governing these issues.

Petition Forms

This Court received comments regarding the inclusion of the “Disclosure of Assistance by a Nonlawyer” on the domestic and repeat violence petition forms as well as on all other forms. Concern was raised as to the safety of the person assisting a victim of domestic violence in filling out the forms. Further, many comments asserted that there was no rule requiring this information and that it should thus be deleted from all forms. That argument is erroneous.

The disclosure is directed by Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 10-2.1(a). That rule provides in pertinent part as follows:

(a) Unlicensed Practice of Law. The unlicensed practice of law shall mean the practice of law, as prohibited by statute, court rule, and ease law of the State of Florida. For purposes of this chapter, it shall not constitute the unlicensed practice of law for a nonlawyer to engage in limited' oral communications to assist a person in the completion of blanks on a legal form approved by the Supreme Court of Florida. Oral communications by nonlawyers are restricted to those communications reasonably necessary to elicit factual information to complete the blanks on the form and inform the person how to file the form.

The following language shall appear on any form completed pursuant to this rule and any individuals assisting in the completion of the form shall provide their name, business name, address, and telephone number on the form:

This form was completed with the assistance of:

Name of Individual

Name of Business

Address

Telephone Number

Before a nonlawyer assists a person in the completion of a form in the manner set forth in this rule, the nonlawyer shall provide the person with a copy of a disclosure. A copy of the disclosure, signed by both the nonlawyer and the person, shall be given to the person to retain and the non-lawyer shall keep a copy in the person’s file. The disclosure does not act as or constitute a waiver, disclaimer, or limitation of liability.

(Emphasis added.) The Florida Family Law Forms were originally drafted by the standing committee on the unlicensed practice of law and were approved by this Court as simplified forms for pro se litigants. The intent in approving the numerous forms available in family law is still to assist pro se litigants, and the disclosure information is still required by that rule. We conclude that the disclosure information should continue to be required on the Florida Family Law Forms generally. We agree, however, that the safety of the victim as well as that of the form preparer is potentially at risk by the disclosure of this information on domestic and repeat violence petition forms. Further, most petition forms in domestic and repeat violence cases are completed at the office of the clerk of court, thus reducing the risk of unlicensed practice of law by form preparers. As such, we conclude that there should be a narrow exception to the disclosure requirement when domestic or repeat violence is at issue. Accordingly, we -find that rule 10-2.1(a) should be modified to eliminate the requirement that the name, address, and telephone number of the preparer be placed on domestic and repeat violence forms, and we have eliminated the nonlawyer disclosure block from forms implementing rule 12.610.

Injunction Forms

We have been asked to require all Florida judges to use standardized forms for issuing injunctions in domestic and repeat violence cases. Currently, most counties use different injunction forms, which often results in enforcement problems across county lines for law enforcement officers. According to the steering committee and the Governor’s Task Force on Domestic Violence, standardized forms would assist law enforcement officers in the enforcement of injunctions because, at a glance, they would be able to easily determine the terms of an injunction no matter which court generated the injunction.

Most comments received by this Court favored this proposal in concept. Significant concern, however, was raised regarding the forms as proposed. Specifically, concerns were raised as to vague language regarding prohibited contact, language permitting contact generally and visitation with children in the temporary domestic violence injunction forms, the full faith and credit language, language regarding firearms, the length of the forms, and prohibitions against leaving the state with a minor child.

We agree with the concept of -standardized forms and have modified rule 12.610 to require all judges to use the standardized injunction forms contained in Appendix B of this opinion. To accommodate the concerns addressed in the preceding paragraph, we have reviewed each of the suggestions in detail and have modified the injunction forms accordingly. For instance, where the forms prohibited a respondent from going “near” a petitioner’s residence or place of employment, we have modified the forms to prohibit a respondent from going within 500 feet of petitioner’s residence or place of employment unless otherwise provided by the trial judge issuing the injunction. Numerous other similar changes were made in response to specific comments received.

Additionally, some 'comments noted the. significant length of some forms due to the inclusion of standardized provisions regarding support and visitation issues that were not applicable to all cases. To 'accommodate those concerns, we have structured the injunction forms so that pages addressing support and visitation issues are .separate and can be included or deleted as necessary. Judges are provided with a provision at the end of each applicable injunction form to indicate whether pages regarding support and visitation issues are included and to thus alert law enforcement officers as to the inclusion or exclusion of those pages.

We have also eliminated the options for allowing contact between the petitioner and respondent and visitation with minor children in the temporary injunction form. The “additional provisions” space on the form will still allow judges to include provisions for contact or visitation; however, comments received expressed concern that a form which included a standard provision allowing for contact and/or visitation would encourage contact during the brief but volatile period of time between the issuance of the temporary and permanent injunctions. Some modifications in this regard have also been made to the permanent injunction form.

The full faith and credit language that was included on the domestic violence injunctions has been modified to eliminate the language that the form “shall be afforded full faith and credit.” The federal statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2265 (1994), does mandate that protection orders be afforded full faith and credit if certain conditions are met. However, comments received pointed out that such a determination must be made on a ease by case basis by the judge issuing the order and a judge in the state in which enforcement is sought. The language has been modified to indicate that the “[i]t is intended ” that the injunction be afforded full faith and credit.

We were also asked by the Governor’s Task Force on Domestic Violence to eliminate the provision in the forms precluding a victim from leaving the state with the parties’ minor child. The concern was that a victim could not leave the state if necessary for safety purposes. Having considered this proposal, we conclude that a victim should be permitted to leave the state with the parties’ minor child only if permitted through court order. While we recognize the concern for the victim’s safety, this concern can be easily remedied by simply asking for permission to leave the state when filing the petition.

We were also requested to, make mandatory the current “optional” prohibition against possession of firearms or ammunition as well as to require that all firearms be surrendered to law enforcement. Currently, it is a violation of federal law to possess certain firearms while under an injunction for protection. 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8)(1994). However, there is apparently no similar provision in Florida law, and the federal prohibition covers only firearms used “in commerce.” Under these circumstances, we are without authority to require Florida judges to automatically preclude possession of firearms. That would require a substantive legislative act. While we believe that judges would be well advised to make such a preclusion, we have left the provision optional. We have, however, included additional space on the form for judges to include instructions regarding the surrender of firearms and any related procedure for doing so should they conclude that surrender is appropriate.

Both the committees and this Court also recognize that individual counties and circuits may have local provisions that need to be incorporated into the forms. The rule thus provides a procedure to be used to incorporate local provisions into the forms.

We have also been asked to make changes to rule 12.610 and related injunctions forms regarding the following two issues: (1) whether service of the permanent injunction may be mailed when the temporary injunction has been personally served on a respondent; and (2) whether the permanent injunction is to be issued for an indefinite or fixed period of time.

Currently, rule 12.610 provides that both temporary and permanent injunctions in domestic violence cases must be served by personal service. The only exception to this provision is when a party is present at the hearing on a permanent injunction and that party fails or refuses to acknowledge receipt of a certified copy of the injunction from the clerk. Under those circumstances, the clerk may mail a certified copy of the injunction tó that party’s last known address and service is then complete upon mailing. We have been asked to amend rule 12(610 to allow service of the permanent injunction by mail when the respondent has been personally served with the temporary injunction. According, to the rules committee, personal service of the temporary injunction, which (as proposed) includes directives that the permanent injunction will be served by mail, should be sufficient. The justification for the amendment is the difficulty in finding- a respondent after the respondent is removed from the parties’ joint residence.

The domestic violence statute, section 741.30, Florida Statutes (1997), appears to have conflicting provisions regarding this issue. However, at least one provision in this statute specifically requires personal service of the permanent injunction. See § 741.30(7)(c)l. (“Within 24 hours after the court issues an injunction for protection against domestic violence ... the clerk of the court must forward a certified copy of the injunction for service to the sheriff with jurisdiction over the residence of the petitioner. The injunction must be served in accordance with the subsection.”) (emphasis added). We received many comments from both judges and prosecutors opposing any change that would allow service by. mail due to concerns about enforcement of the injunction and prosecution of injunction violations. ' We agree with those concerns. We conclude that the rule should not be amended to allow service by mail.

Section 741.30 has also been revised to provide that the terms of an injunction are to remain in effect until modified or dissolved. See § 741.30(6)(b). Recommended changes to the rules and forms conform to that requirement. Some- comments opposed this change because of problems that arise when awards of support and custody are made in a domestic violence injunction but no dissolution action is ever filed. In effect, by eliminating time limitations on permanent injunctions, the legislature has directed the courts to make.permanent decisions regarding support and custody in domestic violence proceedings. While we recognize that an injunction should perhaps be issued for an indefinite period of time for purposes of protecting victims from violence, we agree with the concerns raised about this change. Further, we do not believe that the legislature can restrict a trial court’s discretion to place time limitations on injunctions it issues. We have thus made modifications to allow judges to choose whether the injunction is to be indefinite or is to expire on a date certain.

MANDATORY DISCLOSURE

Both the steering and rules committees have requested changes to rule 12.285, which governs mandatory disclosure. First, we have been asked to modify the rule to reduce the scope and amount of items to be disclosed. Currently, any party'whose income exceeds $50,000 per annum must file a number of items covering a period of three years preceding the filing of a petition and must automatically file answers to standard interrogatories. Under the proposed changes, the time period covered for most items to be produced has been reduced to one year or three months and would apply to all parties regardless of income; interrogatories would be supplemental to the financial affidavits and would not be automatic. Additionally, the committees recommend shortening the financial affidavits and requiring that any party making over $30,000 per annum file the long-form affidavit. We agree with all of the recommendations except the last. We conclude that the rule should continue to require any party making over $50,000 per annum to file the long-form affidavit, but note that the affidavit is shorter than the one currently contained in the rules. We reject the request that those with income between $30,000 and $50,000 also be required to file this long-form affidavit.

Second, we have been asked to allow parties to be exempted from the mandatory filing of financial affidavits. Currently, all parties must file financial affidavits with the court. Presumably, to avoid public disclosure, the rules committee seeks- to amend rule 12.285 to allow a court to exempt individuals from this requirement when they certify that they are serving the financial affidavits on each other. Only one comment was filed regarding this issue, cautioning that judges must have the financial affidavits to make financial determinations. We decline to adopt this recommendation at this time because we are concerned about the problems this change could cause. For instance, in any case where a court is'charged with dividing the assets and liabilities of parties, financial affidavits are necessary to assist in such a decision. Moreover, even where no dispute exists as to the division of assets, financial affidavits must be available to the court should subsequent litigation in the case ensue, such as modification requests or subsequent allegations of fraud.. If financial affidavits are not filed with the court, the court might be significantly hindered in rendering future decisions regarding a ease. Further, as we noted in Family Law I, under certain limited conditions, financial affidavits could be sealed if necessary. See Barron v. Florida Freedom Newspapers, Inc., 531 So.2d 113 (Fla.1988). See also Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.051.

A third proposal concerning mandatory disclosure is the steering committee’s request to create new rule 12.287. The new rule would allow parties to serve requests for financial affidavits in enforcement or contempt proceedings because, under the current mandatory disclosure rule, an interrogatory process is the only means available to obtain such an affidavit. We approve the rule as proposed by the committee.

EVALUATION OF MINOR CHILDREN

The rules committee seeks adoption of a new rule, 12.363, concerning interviews, testing, and evaluations of minor children to discourage multiple evaluations and evaluations conducted by one party without the knowledge of the other. Such a rule was proposed but rejected by this Court when the family law rules were first adopted after numerous comments were received objecting to particular provisions of the rule. See Family Law I. The committee has altered the proposal to eliminate many of the concerns raised when it was previously proposed. We received only one comment to this proposal, which expressed support for the new rule. We approve the rule as proposed.

COURT-APPOINTED EXPERTS

The rules committee also seeks adoption of new rule 12.365 concerning the appointment of experts by the court. Among other things, the proposed rule provides for the method and order of appointment; restricts communication of the experts with the court except with notice and an opportunity to be present and heard during such communication; and provides that the report shall be served- on the parties prior to trial. It does not apply to the appointment of experts under proposed new rule 12.363. As with rule 12.363, a similar rule was proposed and rejected when the family law rules were proposed in Family Law I. We note that the committee has made a number of changes to the rule as proposed here, but we still are concerned about the increase in costs the adoption of this rule may cause the parties. We decline to approve the proposed rule at this time.

HEARING OFFICERS

Currently, rule 12.491 prohibits hearing officers from hearing contested paternity cases. Under the proposed amendment to that rule, hearing officers are prohibited only from presiding over jury trials in paternity eases but they may evaluate evidence and make findings and recommendations regarding paternity in cases where a jury trial will not be conducted. The steering committee requests this change to comply with federal requirements regarding an expedited paternity determination in certain cases. We decline to adopt this change at this time. The fact that an expedited paternity determination is required in certain cases does not eliminate the right of litigants to have substantive due process decisions be determined by article V judicial officers. Federal regulations cannot change or eliminate that right. Clearly, judges can provide expedited paternity determinations when necessary. Given the nature of paternity proceedings, we decline to approve this proposed change.

MOTIONS FOR NEW TRIAL AND REHEARING

The steering committee seeks to expand rule 12.530, which governs motions for new trial and rehearing and amendments of judgments, to address the need to require parties to bring an omission of factual findings required under chapter 61 to the trial court’s attention. The committee suggests that this change will eliminate unnecessary appeals. The committee does raise the concern as to what would happen when one party invokes the rule, which would delay the time for filing an appeal, but another party wants to appeal other issues.

This proposed rule change is opposed by the rules committee and several comments were received raising concerns about the change and its interaction with the appellate rules.

We decline to adopt this rule at this time given the concerns raised by the committees and comments. The purpose of the proposed rule does seem to have merit; however, the steering and rules committees need to discuss this proposal with the appellate rules committee, and appropriate rule changes to both the family law and appellate rules need to be crafted that dnsure the appellate rights of litigants are not compromised.

CIVIL CONTEMPT

The rules committee. seeks adoption of a new rule to govern the procedures for noticing a hearing on contempt, for establishing purge conditions, and for providing a contem-nor’s right of review. The committee asserts that this rule is necessary to avoid the current confusion that exists in handling civil contempt proceedings, particularly when those proceedings are before a hearing officer or general master.

We have a number of serious concerns regarding this rale as proposed. Any rale concerning contempt, particularly one dealing with incarceration,, must comply with United States and Florida Supreme Court decisions in this area. International Union, United Mine Workers v. Bagwell, 512 U.S. 821, 114 S.Ct. 2552, 129 L.Ed.2d 642 (1994); Bowen v. Bowen, 471 So.2d 1274 (Fla.1985); Pugliese v. Pugliese, 347 So.2d 422 (Fla. 1977). Portions of the rule as proposed appear to require a prospective finding of contempt before the contemnor has had an opportunity to be heard. This would violate the due process rights of contemnors and be specifically prohibited by the above decisions. Further, certain language in the rule imposes a rebuttable presumption that the contemnor has-the present ability to comply with a prior order. The language apparently is derived from section 61.14(5)(a), Florida Statutes (1997), which addresses support enforcement. Unlike the statutory provision, however, the rule as written covers “any civil contempt proceeding” — it is not limited to support. We are concerned that this is a substantive change not intended by the statute.

While we are not necessarily opposed to the adoption of a rale regarding contempt proceedings, we find the new rale, as proposed, to be unacceptable. Because we reject the adoption of this rale, we have, of necessity, eliminated proposed forms that would implement portions of this rule.

CASE MANAGEMENT AND PRETRIAL CONFERENCES FOR ADOPTIONS

The rules committee seeks to amend rule 12.200, governing case management conferences, to require ease management conferences in adoption proceedings. Under the proposed amendment, the eourt mil determine notice, intermediary, and cost issues early in the litigation to avoid protracted adoption litigation. We approve the proposed amendments to this rule.

INCOME DEDUCTION FORMS

We have eliminated the income deduction forms currently contained in the judgments and orders portion of the forms. First, those forms are no longer orders given changes in the statute and should be placed elsewhere in the forms. Second, several of the forms must be rewritten because portions are incorrect. Third, we have serious due process concerns regarding the ability of a party to require income to be deducted from another party’s paycheck without the necessity of a court order. While the statute governing this issue allows this to be done, the process for doing so is not definitive and has caused significant confusion. For instance, the forms as drafted provide that the clerk of court is to sign the forms to verify payments to be made. Comments received regarding this issue ask that the clerk’s verification be deleted from these forms due to the burden this verification places on the clerks. Additionally, we understand that proposed legislation is currently being drafted to amend the process and to address these issues. We suggest that the committees evaluate these concerns and any new legislation that passes regarding income deduction and then draft new proposed forms accordingly.

MISCELLANEOUS SUGGESTIONS

The committees and interested individuals and groups who commented on the rules made numerous other suggestions, most of which are technical and most of which we have implemented. Some, however, have not been implemented at this time. For instance, in the response of the rules committee to the forms submitted by the steering committee, the rules committee suggests that the words “custody” and “visitation” be eliminated in the forms and instructions given that other terms such as “shared parental responsibility” and “primary residency” are now to be used in place of the terms “custody” and “visitation.” Likewise, the committee suggests that rule 12.440 be clarified to provide when uncontested final hearings are to be set by court order or notice of hearing and that the forms be amended accordingly. The committee submitted no proposed rules or forms to implement those changes. While we agree that these changes may need to be implemented, given the massive nature of the amendment of the 550-plus pages of the rules and forms in this case, we decline to adopt these recommendations until the rules or steering committee submits proposed rules and forms that specifically incorporate these suggestions.

The rules committee has also asked that we adopt a new form for notice of lis pen-dens. Before adopting this form, we ask the rules committee to prepare an appropriate instruction sheet to advise litigants why and when that form is to be used.

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

In addition to recommended changes to the rules and forms, the steering committee, in its annual report, made recommendations regarding the future direction of the Family Court Initiative. In its report, the committee makes certain conclusions and recommendations concerning its responsibilities. First, it concludes that the original notion of the “one family — one judge” concept, that is, that all court matters involving members of the same family be handled by the same judge, is “unrealistic and unworkable.” Instead, the committee recommends that our judicial system have “an integrated and coordinated approach that insures that any judge handling any matter involving a member of a family will be well informed as to any other pending matters involving another member of that same family.”

Second, it recommends that a comprehensive array of services and referrals be implemented to assist self-represented litigants. According to the committee, while we have made significant strides in this area by implementing the family law forms and related instructions, we must continue to work towards developing personnel and automation prototypes to enable circuits to provide an integrated approach to family eases and must pursue funding to accomplish this objective.

Third, the committee asks that this Court clarify the committee’s responsibilities for monitoring and ensuring compliance by the circuits with the mandates of this Court and of the Family Court Initiative.

Fourth, the committee asks that it be allowed to make revisions to the forms on an annual basis given the large volume of forms and of the need to change those forms whenever statutes affecting the forms are revised.

Finally, the committee asks for this Court’s support in obtaining increased state funding of court support services to meet these goals.

Before addressing the committee’s concerns, we believe that evaluation, review, and perhaps reorganization of both the rules and steering committees may be warranted. At this time, significant overlap exists as to the duties of the two committees. Both committees have provided extremely valuable services in implementing rules and policies regarding the ever- increasing involvement of courts in family matters. The efforts of both committees are to be highly commended. The steering committee has been very instrumental in providing direction for improving assistance and access to the courts for family law litigants. However, a review of the recommendations submitted for rule and form revisions reflects that a significant amount of duplication has occurred in the efforts of the committees. To continue in dual roles appears to be unproductive and costly. To avoid further duplication, we believe that it may be in the best interests of all concerned for the two committees either to have more specifically defined areas of responsibility or to be combined to create one comprehensive body for proceeding with the design and implementation of plans for future development in the area of family law and changes to the rules and forms.

As previously mentioned, we also have concerns that we may have further complicated rather than simplified the family law process through the creation of family law divisions and the adoption of the rules and forms. The very fact that the package of forms and rules consists of over 550 pages is evidence of that complication.

In reviewing the rules and forms, we believe several changes might simplify the process to enhance access. First, we believe that the judgments should be deleted from the forms and be placed in a “bench book” for distribution to judges. Pro se litigants should not be required to provide judges with blank judgment forms. It may be that the Conference of Circuit Judges should appoint a select committee to develop appropriate forms for judicial orders and decrees in family law matters. Second, perhaps the forms and accompanying instructions should be deleted entirely from the rule-making process and be grouped instead into packets for distribution according to the type of proceeding. The forms could then be evaluated and changed on an “as needed” basis and be approved by this Court as simplified forms through opinion rather than being confined by the rule-making process.

The Court recognizes that the manner in which family law cases are processed is an access issue which necessitates significant attention because it can have' a greater effect on individual litigants than any other area of the law. To that end, we request the committees to make recommendations by September 1,1998, regarding how best to accomplish the objectives outlined in this section of this opinion.

CONCLUSION

We commend the work of both committees in their efforts to further simplify the rules and forms. We recognize that the work regarding simplification will be a continuing process. Further, as noted above, we believe that many of the proposed changes that we have declined to approve in this opinion may have merit. As such, we will allow revisions to the proposed changes and/or additional comments to the matters discussed in this opinion to be submitted to this Court no later than May 1, 1998. This Court may set any of those issues on which comment is received for oral argument during the Court’s June 1998 oral argument calendar.

Accordingly, we adopt the amendments to the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure as set forth in Appendix A and the revised forms and related instructions as set forth in Appendix B effective midnight, March 1, 1998.

It is so ordered.

KOGAN, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, WELLS, ANSTEAD and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.

NO MOTION FOR REHEARING WILL BE ENTERTAINED BY THE COURT GIVEN THAT WE WILL BE ACCEPTING COMMENTS UNTIL MAY 1, 1998, TO BE CONSIDERED IN JUNE 1998.

APPENDIX A

RULE 12.070. PROCESS

(aj-Family--Lavw-Actiens- Generally. — Service of process uUpon the commencement of all family law actions, including proceedings to modify a final judgment, except domestic and- repeat violenceservice of process shall be as set forth in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.0707. except thatThe summons, cross-claim summons, and third-party summons in family law matters shall be patterned after Florida Family Law Form 12.910(a) and shall specifically contain the following language:

WARNING: Rule 12.285, Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure, requires certain automatic disclosure of documents and information. Failure to comply can result in sanctions, including dismissal or striking of pleadings.

This rule does not govern service of process in domestic and repeat violence proceedings.

(b) Domestic and Repeat -Violence Injunctions. — Service of process -regarding-domestic and repeat- violence actions shalb-be governed-by Florida Family -Law Rule of Pro cedur e-1-2.61 Or

RULE 12.080. SERVICE OF PLEADINGS AND PAPERS

(a) Service.

(1) Family Law Actions Generally. Service of pleadings and papers after commencement of all family, law actions except domestic and repeat violence shall be as set forth in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.080, except that rule 1.080 shall be expanded as set forth in subdivisions (b) and (c) to include additional requirements for service of recommended orders and for service on defaulted parties.

(2) Domestic and Repeat Violence Actions. Service of pleadings and papers regarding domestic and repeat violence actions shall be governed by Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.610.

(b) Service and Preparation of Orders and Judgments.

(3-)-Family Law Actions Generally, A copy of all orders or judgments involving family law matters except domestic and repeat violence shall be transmitted by the court or under its direction to all parties at the time of entry of the order or judgment. The court may require that recommended orders, orders, or judgments be prepared by a party. If the court requires that a party prepare the recommended order, order, or judgment, the party shall furnish the court with stamped, addressed envelopes to all parties for service of the recommended order, order, or judgment. The court also may require that any proposed recommended order, order, or judgment that is prepared by a party be" furnished to all parties no less than 24 hours before submission to the court of the recommended order, order, or judgment.

(2) Domestic and Repeat Violence Acr tions. — Service and preparation -of orders and judgments involving domestic and-repeat violence shall be governed by- Florida Family Law Rule of-Procedure-12.64(L

(c) Defaulted Parties. No service need be made on parties against whom a default has been entered, except that:

(1) Pleadings asserting new or additional claims against defaulted parties shall be served in the manner provided for service of summons contained in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.070.

(2) Notice of final hearings or trials and court-orders shall be served on defaulted parties in the manner provided for service of pleadings and papers contained in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.080.

(3) Final judgments shall be served on defaulted parties as set forth in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.080(h)(2).

Commentary

1995 Adoption. This rule provides that the procedure for service shall be as set forth in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.080 with the following exceptions or additions to that rule. First, subdivision (b) corresponds to and replaces subdivision (h)(1) of rule 1.080 and expands the rule to include recommended orders. Second, this rule expands items that must be served on defaulted parties to ensure that defaulted parties are at least minimally advised of the progress of the proceedings. This rule is not intended to require the furnishing of a proposed recommended order, proposed order, or proposed final judgment to a defaulted party.

RULE 12.200. CASE MANAGEMENT AND PRETRIAL CONFERENCES

(a) Case Management Conference.

(1) Family Law Proceedings, Generally. A case management conference may be ordered by the court at any time on the court’s initiative. A party may request a case management conference 30 days after service of a petition or complaint. At such a conference the court may:

(1A) schedule or reschedule the service of motions, pleadings, and other papers;

(2B) set or reset the time of trials, subject to rule 12.440;

(3C) coordinate the progress of the action if complex litigation factors are present;

(4D) limit, schedule, order, or expedite discovery;

(5E ) schedule disclosure of expert witnesses and the discovery of facts known and opinions held by such experts;

(OF) schedule or hear’motions related to admission or exclusion of evidence;

(?G) pursue the possibilities of settlement;

(8H) require filing of preliminary stipulations if issues can be narrowed;

(91) refer issues to a master for findings of fact, if consent is obtained as provided in rules 12.490 and 12.492 and if no significant history of domestic or repeat violence that would compromise the process is involved in the case;

(46J) refer the parties to mediation if no significant history of domestic or repeat violence that would compromise the mediation process is involved, in the case and consider allocation of expenses related to the referral; or refer the parties to counseling if no significant history of domestic or repeat violence that would compromise the process is involved in the ease and consider allocation of expenses related to the referral;

(44K) coordinate voluntary binding arbitration consistent with Florida law if no significant history of domestic or repeat violence that would compromise the process is involved in the case;

(42L) appoint court experts and allocate the expenses for the appointments;

(43M) refer the cause for a home study or psychological evaluation and allocate the initial expense for that study;

(44N) appoint an attorney or guardian ad litem for a minor child or children if required and allocate the expense of the appointment; and

(450) schedule other conferences or determine other matters that may aid in the disposition of the action.

(2) Adoption Proceedings. A case management conference shall be ordered by the court within 60 days of the filing of a petition when

(A) there is a request for a waiver of consent to an adoption by those persons required to consent by section 63.062, Florida Statutes;

(B) notice of the hearing on the petition to adopt is not afforded a person whose consent is required but who has not consented;

(C) an intermediary, attorney, or agency is seeking fees or costs- in excess of those provided under sections 63.097 or 63.212(4), Florida Statutes;

(D) an affidavit of diligent search and Inquiry is filed in lieu of personal service; or •

(E) the court is otherwise aware that any person having standing objects to the adoption.

(b) Pretrial Conference. After the action is at issue the court itself may or shall on the timely motion of any party require the parties to appear for a conference to consider and determine:

(1) proposed stipulations and the simplification of the'issues;

(2) the necessity or desirability of amendments to the pleadings;

(3) the possibility of obtaining admissions of fact and of documents that will avoid unnecessary proof;

(4) the limitation of the number of expert witnesses; and

(5) any matters permitted under subdivision (a) of this rule.

(c) Notice. Reasonable notice shall be given for a case management conference, and 20 days’ notice shall be given for a pretrial conference. On failure of a party to attend a conference, the court may dismiss the action, strike the pleadings, limit proof or witnesses, or take any other appropriate action. Any documents that the court requires for any conference shall be specified in the order. Orders setting pretrial conferences shall be uniform throughout the territorial jurisdiction of the court.

(d) Case Management and Pretrial Order. The court shall make an order reciting the action taken at a conference and any stipulations made. The order shall control the subsequent course of the action unless modified to prevent injustice.

Commentary

1995 Adoption. This rule addresses issues raised by decisions such as Dralus v. Dralus, 627 So.2d 505 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Wrona v. Wrona, 592 So.2d 694 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); and Katz v. Katz, 505 So.2d 25 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987), regarding the cost of marital litigation. This rule provides an orderly method for the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of issues and promotes amicable resolution of disputes.

This rule replaces and substantially expands Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.200 as it pertained to family law matters. Under this rule, a court may convene a ease management conference at any time and a party may request a case management conference 30 days after service of a petition or complaint. The court may consider the following additional items at the conference: motions related to admission or exclusion of evidence, referral of issues to a master if consent is obtained pursuant to the rules, referral of the parties to mediation, referral of the parties to counseling, coordination of voluntary binding arbitration, appointment of court experts, referral of the cause for a home study psychological evaluation, and appointment of an attorney or guardian ad litem for a minor child.

Committee Note

1997 Amendment. In In re Adoption of Baby E.A.W., 658 So.2d 961 (Fla.1995), and other cases involving protracted adoption litigation, it becomes clear that the earlier the issue of notice is decided by the court, the earlier the balance of the issues can be litigated. Because both parents’ constitutional standing and guarantees of due process require notice and an opportunity to be heard, this rule amendment will help solve the problems of adoption litigation lasting until a child’s third, fourth, or even fifth birthday. Furthermore, this rule will encourage both parents to be more candid with intermediaries and attorneys involved in the adoption process.

In E.A.W., 658 So.2d at 979, Justice Ko-gan, concurring in part and dissenting in part, stated: “I personally urge the Family Law Rules Committee ... to study possible methods of expediting review of disputes between biological and adoptive parents.” This rule expedites resolution of preliminary matters concerning due process in difficult adoption disputes. This rule also mandates early consideration of the child’s rights to due process at early stages of adoption litigation.

Noncompliance with subdivision (a)(2) of this rule shall not invalidate an otherwise valid adoption.

RULE 12.285. MANDATORY DISCLOSURE

(a) Application.

(1) Scope. This rule shall apply to all proceedings 'within the scope of these rules except proceedings involving adoption, simplified dissolution, enforcement, contempt, and injunctions for domestic or repeat violence, and uncontested dissolutions when the respondent is served by publication and does not file an answer. Additionally, no financial affidavit or other documents shall be required under this rule from a party seeking attorneys’ fees, suit money, or costs, if the basis for the request is solely under section 57.105, Florida Statutes, or any successor statute. Except for the provisions as to financial affidavits, any portion of this rule may be modified by order of the court or agreement of the parties.

(2) Original and Duplicate Copies. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties or ordered by the court, copies of documents required under this rule may be produced in lieu of originals. Originals, when available, shall be produced for inspection upon request. Parties shall not be required to serve duplicates of documents previously served.

(b) Time for Production of Documents.

(1) Temporary Financial Hearings. Any document required under this rule in any temporary financial relief proceeding shall be served on the other party for inspection and copying as follows.

(A) The party seeking relief shall serve the required documents on the other party with the notice of temporary financial hearing, unless the documents have been served under subdivision (b)(2) of this rule.

(B) The responding party shall serve the required documents on the party seeking relief on or before 5:00 p.m., 2 business days before the day of the temporary financial hearing if served by delivery or 7 days before the day of the temporary financial hearing if served by mail, unless the documents have been received previously by the party seeking relief under subdivision (b)(2) of this rule. A responding party shall be given no less than 12 days to serve the documents required under this rule, unless otherwise ordered by the court. If the 45-day period for exchange of documents provided for in subdivision (b)(2) of this rule will occur before the expiration of the 12 days, the provisions of subdivision (b)(2) control.

(2) Initial and Supplemental Proceedings. Any document required under this rule for any initial or supplemental proceeding shall be served on the other party for inspection and copying within 45 days of service of the initial pleading on the respondent.

(c)Disclosure Requirements for Temporary Financial Relief. In any proceeding for temporary financial relief heard within 45 days of the service of the initial pleading or within any extension of the time for complying with mandatory disclosure granted by the court or agreed to by the parties, the following documents shall be served on the other party:

(1) A financial affidavit in substantial conformity with Family Law Form 12.901(d) if the party’s gross annual income is less than $50,000, or Family Law Form 12.901(e) if the party’s gross annual income is equal to or more than $50,000. This requirement cannot be waived by the parties. The affidavit must also must be filed with the court.

(2) A Child Support Guidelines Worksheet in substantial conformity with Family Law Form 12.901(g), if the case involves child support.

(3) All federal and state income tax re-. turns, gift tax returns, and intangible personal property tax returns filed by the party or on the party’s behalf for the past year. A party may file a transcript of the tax return as provided by Internal Revenue Service Form 4506 in lieu of his or her individual federal income tax return for purposes of a temporary hearing.

(4) IRS forms W-2, 1099, and K-l for the past year, if the income tax return for that year has not been prepared.

(5) Pay stubs or other evidence of earned income for the 3 months prior to service of the financial affidavit.

(ed) Parties’-Whose Annual Income and Expenses Are Less Than SSO^OO.Disclo-sure Requirements for Initial or Supplement Proceedings. Any party whose-gross annual income-feom all sources is less-than $50,000 and whose total annual-expenses are less-than $50^)00 shall be required to serve the following documents in any proceeding for an initial or supplemental request for temporary or permanent financial relief, including, but not limited to, a request for child support, alimony, equitable distribution of assets or debts, or attorneys’ fees, suit money, or costs:

(1) A financial affidavit in substantial conformity with Family Law Form 12.901(d) if the party’s gross annual income is less than $50,000, or Family Law Form 12.901(e) if the party’s gross annual income is equal to or more than $50,000, which requirement cannot be waived by the parties, and which. The financial affidavits also must be filed with the court. A party may request, by using the Standard Family Law Interrogatories, or the court on its own motion may order, a party whose gross annual income is less than $50,000 to complete Family Law Form 12.901(e).

(2) A Child Support Guidelines Worksheet in substantial conformity with Family Law Form 12.901(g), if the case involves child support.

(23) All federal and state income tax returns, gift tax returns, and intangible personal property tax returns filed by the party or on the party’s behalf for the past three 3 years.

(34) IRS forms W-2, 1099, and K-l for the past year, if the income tax return for that year has not been prepared.

(45) Pay stubs or other evidence of earned income for the 3 months prior to service of the financial affidavit.

(56) A statement by the producing party identifying the amount and source of all income received from any source during the 3 months preceding the service of the financial affidavit required by this rule if not reflected on the pay stubs produced.

(67) All loan applications and financial statements prepared or used within the 3-years!2 months preceding service of that party’s financial affidavit required by this rule, whether for the purpose of obtaining or attempting to obtain credit or for any other purpose."

(d) Parties Whose Annual- Income or Expenses Are Equal To or Exceed $50,000. Any party whose gross annual income from. all sources is equal-to-or exceeds $50,000 or whose-total annual expenses are equal-to or exceed $50,000 shal-l-be required-to serve the documents on — the-other party as follows*

(-1) Temporary Financial Relief, — In any-proceeding for temporary financial relief, the following -documents shall be served on the-other party:

(A)-A financial- affidavit- -in substantial conformity — wife—Family—Law—Form 124101(e), which-requirement cannot -be waived by the -parties-,-and which-also must beffi-led wife-fee-court.

(-B) All federal and state income tax returns, gift tax returns, and intangible personal property tax-returns-filed by the party or on-the party’s bohal-f-for the past 3 years.

(C) IRS forms W-2, 1099^-and K-l for the past year, if-the income tax return for that-year has-not been prepared.

(D) Pay stubs — or other evidence of earned income-for the 3 months- prior to service of the financial affidavit.

(E) A statement by the producing party identifying the.amount and source of all income' received -from- -any -source during fee-3-months-preceding fee-service of the financial affidavit required -byMhis rule if not reflected-on the pay sfabs-produced.

(-F-)-AII loan-applications and financial statements prepared or used within the 3 years preceding-service of that party’s financial affidavit — required -by -this rule, whether for-the purpose of obtaining or attempting to-obtain credit or for any other-purpose.

(^-Corporate, — -partnership, and trust tax -returns -for the last tax — year- if the producing party has-an interest in a corporation, partnership, or trust-greater than or equal to 30%.

(2) Initial Proceedings. — In any initial proceeding for permanent-financial relief, including, but not-limted to?-a-request for child support,-alimony, equitable distribution-of-assets or debts, or attorneys’-fees, suit money, or costs, the following-documents shall — be served on the other party;

(A) All documents-listed in subdivision (d)(1), including the financial- affidavit which also must-be -fileehwith the courfi

(B) The- — answers—te—interrogatories' found in Family Law Form 12.930(b).

(C) All documents-showing reimbursed expenses and in-kind payments that reduce the — party’s personal living expenses — that were received by or made available to-the party for-the last 3 years-.

(B8) All deeds within the last 3 years, all promissory notes within the last 12 months, and all present leases,-mortgages; promissory notes, and closing — statements pertaining to real estate in which the party owns or owned an interest withln--the4ast-3-years, whether held in the party’s name indi-' vidually, in the party’s name jointly with any other person or entity, in the party’s name as trustee or guardian for any other person, or in someone else’s name on the party’s behalf.

(E9) All periodic statements and passbooks from the last 3 years months for all checking accounts, and from the last 12 months for all other accounts (for example, savings accounts, money market funds, certificates of deposit, etc.), and credit union-accounts (regardless of whether or not the account has been closed), including those held in the party’s name individually, in the party’s name jointly with any other person or entity, in the party’s name as trustee or guardian for any other person, or in someone else’s name on the party’s behalf.

(FIO) All brokerage account statements in which either party to this action held within the last 3~yearsl2 months or holds an interest including those held in the party’s name individually, in the party’s name jointly with any person or entity, in the party’s name as trustee or guardian for any other person, or in someone else’s name on the party’s behalf.

(G) All title certificates-, — lease—agreements, and registration certificates for all motor vehicles, boatSi-ainplane^-and-any^other vehicle requiring registration that the party regularly uses, owns, or owned in the last 3' year-s-.-

(Sll) The most recent statement for any profit sharing, retirement, deferred compensation, or pension plan (for example, IRA, 401(k), 403(b), SEP, KEOGH, or other similar account) in which the party is a participant or alternate payee and the summary plan description for any retirement, profit sharing, or pension plan in which the party is a participant or an alternate payee. (The summary plan description must be furnished to the party on request by the plan administrator as required by 29 U.S.C. § 1024(b)(4).)

(I-)-All — documents pertaining -to — any money owed -to-the party or spouse.

(J12) The declarations page, the last periodic statement, and the certificate for any group insurance for a All life insurance policies insuring the party’s life or the life of the party’s spouse-, and all current health and dental insurance cards covering either of the parties and/or their dependent children.

(K13) Corporate, partnership, and trust tax returns for the last 3 tax years if the party has an ownership or interest in a corporation, partnership, or trust greater than or equal to 30%.

(L14) PeriodieAll promissory notes for the last 12 months, all credit card and charge account statements and amortization-schedules, or other records showing the party’s indebtedness as- of the date of the filing of this action and for the last 3 years-months^, and all present lease agreements, whether owed in the party’s name individually, in the party’s name jointly with any other person or entity, in the party’s name as trustee or guardian for any other person, or in someone else’s name on the party’s behalf.

(M15) All written premarital or marital agreements entered into at any time between the parties to this marriage, whether before or during the marriage. Additionally, in any modification proceeding, each party shall serve on the opposing party all written agreements entered into between them at any time since the order to be modified was entered.

(N16) All documents and tangible evidence supporting the producing party’s claim of special equity or nonmarital status of an asset or debt for the time period from the date of acquisition of the asset or debt to the date of production or from the date of marriage, if based on premarital acquisition.

(017) Any court orders directing a party to pay or receive spousal or child support.

(3) Supplemental Proceedings, In any temporary or permanent supplemental — pro-eeeding-i-egarding-financial relief, documents shall-be produced as set forth in subdivisions (d-X-l)--and (d)(2) ¡ respectively and shall be served as-set .forih-in- subdivision (b). Additionally,-in any-modification proceeding,-each party shall serve on the opposing party all written agreements entered-into- between them at - any -time- since the order-to be modified was entered-.

(e) Duty to Supplement Disclosure; Amended Financial Affidavit.

(1) Parties have a continuing duty to supplement documents described in this rule, including financial affidavits, whenever a material change in their financial status occurs.

(2) If an amended financial affidavit or an amendment to a financial affidavit is filed, the amending party also shall serve any subsequently discovered or acquired documents supporting the amendments to the financial affidavit if tho party falls within the-provisions of subdivision (d).

(f) Sanctions. Any document to be produced under this rule that is served on the opposing party fewer than 24 hours before a nonfinal hearing or in violation of the court’s pretrial order shall not be admissible in evidence at that hearing unless the.court finds good cause for the delay. In addition, the court may impose other sanctions authorized by rule 12.380 as may be equitable under the circumstances. The court may also impose sanctions upon the offending lawyer in lieu of imposing sanctions on a party.

(g) Extensions of Time for Complying with Mandatory Disclosure. By agreement of the parties, the time for complying with mandatory disclosure may be extended. Either party also may file, at least 5 days