NH Redress of Grievance Committee PETITION # 20 Grievance of Carl E. Dow-Founded

News | Kevin Avard for State Rep:

Another Grievance Founded!

Published July 14, 2012 | By kevin

COMMITTEE REPORT

PETITION # 20 grievance of Carl E. Dow.
MAJORITY
Grievance Founded.
The Committee found that the Petitioner’s complaints against the Concord Family Division amounted essentially to disagreement and disappointment with the outcome of his divorce proceeding. In particular, the Committee found: (1) that the Court’s Final Decree contained a thorough and thoughtful discussion of the background and course of the Petitioner’s and his wife’s courtship, marriage, and separation; (2) that the Court’s findings of fact set out in the Final Decree were reasonable; (3) that the Court’s disposition of the case was supported by those facts; and (4) that the Petitioner’s allegation that the Court’s disposition of the case was unduly influenced by the marital master’s and judge’s alleged general bias against husbands was not proven. The Committee was concerned by evidence that the guardian ad litem in the case routinely billed for and collected fees in excess of each then pre-approved limit in advance of applying for and receiving the permission of the Court to exceed it, thereby improperly placing the Court in the position of considering, and the Petitioner in the position of defending against, a fait accompli. The Committee believes that the Supreme Court should consider amending its rules governing guardians ad litem to expressly forbid this practice, and in light of these problems, to remove the absolute quasi-judicial immunity as determined in Surprenant v. Mulcrone.  Vote 10-3.
Rep. Gregory Sorg for the Majority of the Committee
MINORITY
Grievance Unfounded.
The Minority finds that the Final Decree is a comprehensive and thorough explanation of the transition from a long-distance courtship to the demise of the marriage.  There were major differences in expectations due in large part to wide culturally diverse backgrounds.  However, it does not appear that the marital master and judge decided rulings or orders based on any bias against the Petitioner.  We do agree with the Majority that in many of the petitions that have come before the Committee, it appears that guardian ad litem fees are approved by the court after the expenses are incurred.  We, therefore, agree the Supreme Court consider amending the rules to end this practice.
Rep. Sandra Keans for the Minority of the Committee.