Wednesday, October 19, 2016

CAPITOL REPORT

This is a status report provided by the New Jersey State Bar Association on recently passed and pending legislation, regulations, gubernatorial nominations and/or appointments of interest to lawyers, as well as the involvement of the NJSBA as amicus in appellate court matters. To learn more, visit njsba.com.

NJSBA Urges Supreme Court Not To Adopt Standardized Guardianship Forms 

The association urged flexibility in the use of required forms for guardianship of incapacitated adults in response to the report and recommendations of the Supreme Court Civil Practice Committee on the proposed revised and new model forms. Citing the complexity and unique nature of guardianship matters, the NJSBA expressed concerns that the model forms do not appear to collect enough information required to meet the guardianship standards established by court rule.

As an alternative, the association suggested it should be acceptable practice to supplement the forms to alleviate potential confusion and delays in guardianship actions to the detriment of the incapacitated person. The association pointed out that there is no standardized form of complaint and urged references to Rule 4:86-1 be included within the package of forms so that applicants know where to find the requirements applicable to a verified complaint.

The report and recommendations of the committee proposed the following model forms:

A newly drafted adult guardianship case information statement;

A newly drafted certification of assets;

A newly drafted certification of physician or psychologist;

A revised order fixing guardianship hearing date and appointing attorney for alleged incapacitated person; (Click to Continue)

Full Article & Source:
CAPITOL REPORT

2 comments:

  1. The forms are complicated and lawyer-speak. They should all be standardized to common language so pro-se litigants have a chance of understanding them and submitting them correctly.

    ReplyDelete
  2. So did the NJSBA submit their suggestions and corrections?

    ReplyDelete