NEW DIVORCE LAW SECTION 132 CIVIL CODE AFFECTS CONCILIATION COURT PROCEDURES

• Date: 01 September 1965
• Published date: 01 September 1965
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.174-1617.1965.tb01119.x

JUDGE

PFAFF

GUEST OF EUROPEAN COUNTRIES

Superior Judge Roger Alton Pfaff

of

Los

Angeles

was

singularly honored in April this year

by being invited by Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Eng-

land, and France

to

visit their countries

to

confer

with judges, law professors, sociologists, and other

individuals and agencies interested in family law

and conciliation procedures.

The foreign offices in the various countries

arranged

a

comprehensive and concise schedule of

meetings for Judge

Pfaff,

thus enabling him

to

ac-

complish in a month what would have taken

4

months

if

he

had

simply gone

to

these countries and then

tried

to

make arrangements

to

see

the various author-

ities

in these specialized fields.

West

Germany, he reports, has had

a

Concil-

iation Procedures Act

for

a

number of years

since

World War

11,

but its observance

is

in

a

more or

less

perfunctory manner since the judges themselves

are

not equipped

to

engage in counseling, and there are

no counseling agencies such

as

we have in the United

States. The programs which are there are very limited,

and in

most

localities

non-existent.

Where counseling services

are

available,

it

is

usually on

a

volunteer basis

or

provided by the

church, and there

seems

to

be

an unwritten rule that

once

a

divorce

case

is

filed none

of

these agencies

will interfere by counseling

a

couple under the ap-

parent belief that they should not inject themselves

into an attorney’s

case.

In England the National Marriage Guidance

Council

is

doing

some

interesting work with volun-

teer counselors who are given

a

brief training course.

The courts do not make referrals to this agency.

However, probation officers in England do perform

counseling services

of

domestic relations

cases

which are referred to them by the Magistrate’s Court,

which

is

a

court

of

lesser jurisdiction than

a

divorce

court. These Magistrate Courts hear a large volume

of

cases

involving child support and custody.

JudgePfaff was most impressed with the work

being done in Denmark by

a

government-sponsored

agency called “Mothers’ Aid” which maintains a

number of such centers throughout the country and

provides assistance and counseling

to

unwed mothers,

family counseling, adoptions, abortions, and any

number

of

problems affecting family

life.

These

“Mothers’ Aid” centers are staffed by competent

personnel.

European judges, law professors, and others

readily admit that there is a great need for expert

counseling but

that

one

of

the greatest problems

is

the lack

of

trained personnel and the general reluc-

tance

to

have the judiciary inject itself into marital

relationships.

In France, which has had mandatory Concil-

iation Procedures for years, little more than lip

service

is

paid

to

the law, and no actual work is done

to

effect reconciliations after

a

divorce has been

filed nor

ace

there any personnel assigned to the

court,

or

otherwise,

for

such purposes.

000

NEW DIVORCE

LAW

SECTION

132

CIVIL CODE

AFFECTS CONCILIATION COURT PROCEDURES

Section

132

Civil Code,

as

amended at the

1965

session

of

the Legislature, provides that the

interlocutory period runs from the date of the service

of

the summons and complaint upon the adverse

party. Formerly the interlocutory period ran from the

date of the interlocutory judgment. This new amend-

ment

to

Section

132

will

have

a

direct bearing, we

feel,

on conciliation court procedures, and remove a

former impediment to the signing

of

a Husband-Wife

Agreement.

In the past there have been numerous in-

stances where

a

couple was considering reconcilia-

tion,

at

a

time

when the pending divorce action had

not yet been

set

for

trial.

The plaintiff in the divorce action, usually

the wife, would often reason

as

follows:

“If

I

sign

a

Husband-Wife Agreement now, and things don’t

work out, then

I

will have to ask

for

a

new trial date,

and then wait

a

year after that before I’m free.

I

think

I

would rather wait until the interlocutory decree has

has been granted and then consider reconciliation.”

All

too often, after the interlocutory judgment had

been entered, there was no chance for reconciliation.

Under the new law, this alleged “penalty”

for

attempting a reconciliation prior to divorce is

eliminated. Signing the Husband-Wife Agreement

before the divorce trial in no way extends the period

time before

a

final could be obtained if the reconcil-

iation fails. The new law should provide

an

incen-

tive to attempt reconciliation to

some

who might

otherwise be reluctant to do

so.

0.0

Superior Court Judge Roger Alton Pfaff

was

elected Chairman

of

the Family Law Section

at

the

Annual Meeting

of

the American Bar Association in

Miami Beach, Florida, August

10,

1965.

0.0

9.