Receive FREE Special Report First Name Email Address I Respect Your Email Privacy

PRIVATE CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS

This rule is adopted in compliance with California Rules of Court:

(a) Peremptory Challenges. When a private evaluator is appointed, other than by stipulation, each side will be permitted one peremptory challenge of a specific evaluator. The challenge must be made within ten (10) court days of the notice of appointment.

(Rule 14.21(a) [7/1/04] amended and effective 1/1/07.)

(b) Withdrawal From a Case. A private evaluator has the right to withdraw from a case upon a showing of good cause before the trial court that made the appointment.

(c) Complaints Regarding Evaluators. Complaints regarding the conduct of and procedures employed by a private child custody evaluator appointed by the Court are the responsibility of the trial court judicial officer who made the appointment and the appropriate professional licensing board. The trial court judge may determine what action, if any, should be taken. In addition, if the evaluator is a member of the Court's list of private evaluators, the complaint will also be the responsibility of the list administrator per Local Rule 14.21(e)4).

(Rule 14.21(c) [7/1/04] amended and effective 1/1/07.)

(d) Training. A person appointed as a child custody evaluator must submit to the court a declaration indicating compliance with all applicable education, training, and experience requirements. A private child custody evaluator must complete a Declaration of Private Child Custody Evaluator Regarding Qualifications (Form FL-326) and file it with the clerk's office no later than 10 days after notification of each appointment and before any work on each child custody evaluation has begun.

(Rule 14.21(d) [originally (e) 7/1/04] renumbered, text repealed, new text added 1/1/07.)

(e) Private Child Custody Evaluators List.

1) In an effort to assist litigants and their attorneys in locating mental health professionals who perform Child Custody Evaluations, the Los Angeles Superior Court has developed a list of mental health professionals who perform child custody evaluations. The Los Angeles Superior Court does not endorse any person on this list, nor are they employees of the Superior Court.

2) The following information describes the qualifications of the mental health professionals on this list, as well as the procedures for filing complaints regarding work performed by members on the list.

a. Qualifications and responsibilities of list members. To be included on this list, a mental health professional must:

i. Be licensed in the State of California in one of the following areas: LCSW, MFT, clinical psychologist, or board certified psychiatrist;

ii. Declare under penalty of perjury that he/she has performed five child custody evaluations within the last three years;

iii. Declare under penalty of perjury that he/she has read The Standards of Practice for Court Appointed Child Custody Evaluations in the California Rules of Court and the Los Angeles Superior Court Local Rule regarding The Private Child Custody Evaluators List;

iv. Complete any training required for child custody evaluators by statute, rule of court, or local rule;

v. Be covered by malpractice insurance;

vi. Not use their inclusion on this list in any advertising.

b. List members must submit the following materials which will be made available to the public:

i. A signed application;

ii. A current résumé;

iii. A copy of the applicable clinical license;

iv. Certificates of completion of 16 hours of advanced domestic violence training and annual updates as required by Family Code section 1816 and California Rules of Court, rule 5.230;

v. Certificates of completion of 40 hours of initial education and training and annual updates as required by California Rules of Court, rule 5.225.

c. Upon appointment to perform an evaluation, members of the list must provide both parties with a letter describing their procedures, including a statement that any written material submitted to the evaluator must be sent to the opposing party and the final date by which written material must be submitted.

3) Any evaluation ordered through this list must be completed and mailed within 10 weeks of receiving the appointment and required deposit, unless extenuating circumstances arise. If an extension is required, the evaluator will notify the court, both parties, and the list administrator by letter. Reasons for the extension are to be described in the letter.

4) Challenges, Complaints, Removal from the List. The Court reserves the right to remove any name from the list upon written notification to the evaluator.

a. Reasons for removal may include, but are not limited to the following:

i. Failure to maintain a clinical license in good standing;

ii. Failure to remain current on training mandated by statute, California Rules of Court, and/or Los Angeles Superior Court Local Rule;

iii. Submission of work that does not meet the standard of practice for court appointed evaluator;

iv. Failure to submit work in a timely fashion;

v. Consistent refusal to accept court referrals.

b. Complaints regarding the content of the evaluation report or the conclusions reached by the evaluator should be made at the time of trial to the trial court hearing the custody matter.

c. Complaints regarding the ethical conduct of the evaluator should be made to the appropriate licensing board.

d. Complaints regarding the procedures used by the evaluator should be addressed in writing to the list administrator. Copies of such complaints will be sent to the evaluator who is the subject of the complaint. All such complaints will be reviewed by the list administrator and answered in writing.

e. Serious complaints regarding the procedures used by an evaluator will be reviewed by a committee appointed by the Supervising Judge of the Family Law Departments. The committee shall consist of the list administrator, a Family Law Judicial Officer, a court-employed evaluator, and may also include a private evaluator and any other person appointed by the Supervising Judge. The committee will review the complaint with the evaluator. If the committeedecides to remove the evaluator from the list, the evaluator will be notified in writing that he/she is being removed from the list. The decision of the committee shall be final and not subject to further review. In reviewing complaints, the members of the committee are persons performing quasi-judicialfunctions, and presiding at quasi-judicial proceedings within the meaning of Evidence Code section 703.5. The records and information in the possession of the committee regarding evaluators is official information acquired in confidence by public employees in the course of their duties, and not open, or officially disclosed to the public within the meaning of both subdivisions (b)(1) and (b)(2) of Evidence Code section 1040.

5) Upon request, disclose any significant personal or professional relationship the evaluator has or has had with a party, attorney, or law firm in the instant case, including the number and nature of any services in the past 24 months in which the evaluator has been privately compensated by a party, attorney, or law firm in the instant case. The services may include, but are not limited to, services provided as an expert witness, consultant, evaluator, special master, mediator, or therapist.

(Rule 14.21 [originally (f) 7/1/04, (f)4)e. 1/1/05] renumbered as (e), amended and effective 1/1/07.)

(Rule 14.21 [adopted 7/1/04, 1/1/05] amended and effective 1/1/07.)