[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6313455,"mediaKeyId","2387857-1edb81b9af79acf4dbeb0cefd11404fa","parentId",2387857,"title","Judiciary committee amends and advances bill to update court fees; civil fees to rise, criminal fees left unchanged","audioSeconds",672,"startMs",1543000,"endMs",2215000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2387857-1edb81b9af79acf4dbeb0cefd11404fa&start=1543&end=2215","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2387857-1edb81b9af79acf4dbeb0cefd11404fa/thumbnail_1543000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6313455/North-Dakota/Judiciary-committee-amends-and-advances-bill-to-update-court-fees-civil-fees-to-rise-criminal-fees-left-unchanged","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6313455-3349e6f9c95e10eef8257251ec705454/orig.mp4?Expires=1771097285&Signature=iaDvdDMhxX96OOyOOz5-pKWlUU2wrTNc9LLwAxeEgHuq8l3bERYibOg~57m3Usnd7itnm8fYpq9QsJkGrZqX9yconBMe2ZafpHnGsxd5fhHG6GvbHk4RqebKteDqVZ-UUVW2UhuQ6siinVlo1-tEz70U9bpI0Tcyy10L~gGKg-3JSYKYfoeMEse0Qhz4~4g6vwLsJ47VcCjxAm16q-nHydl5KTfTOVfRurO-KR4ODyVsUfriqmdG1xNBQosxyT7tYRJZ80U791IYXuClUY~5MmD4MEmMFTIRxq-m5XKgtBv46c~7IiAuzTwZpXuFW598F0ZBVHMtGLvukM-JmB7Aog__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","North Dakota State Legislature","date","2025-02-25T00:00:00Z","article","The House Judiciary Committee adopted an amendment and voted to advance Senate Bill 2057, which updates court fee schedules at the request of the state Supreme Court.

Representative Satrim moved the amendment to implement the Supreme Court's proposed increases for civil fees while leaving criminal fees unchanged; the committee adopted that amendment on a unanimous recorded vote (14–0). The committee then voted to give the bill a do‑pass recommendation, as amended, by a recorded roll call of 8 yes and 6 no. The committee chair noted a fiscal note and said the bill would be re‑referred to Appropriations.

Committee discussion focused on the scope of the changes and the policy of shifting costs from the general fund to users. Representative Van Winkle and others raised concerns about increasing certain filing fees and suggested keeping some filing fees, such as the answer filing fee, at a lower rate. One member summarized the rationale for the amendment by describing court fees as “user fees” that have not been adjusted for decades and that the Supreme Court had provided a document showing increases indexed to inflation; a committee member said many fee levels had last changed in July 1995.

Sarah Barrons, present from the State Court Administrator’s office, told the committee the administrator’s office did not oppose the amendment and that their biggest concern was the level of civil filing fees under the proposed schedule. The chair added that because of the fiscal note, the committee would refer the bill to the Appropriations Committee after voting.

Representative Satrim moved a do‑pass as amended, seconded by Representative Schneider; the clerk recorded the roll call on the do‑pass as amended and the motion carried 8 to 6. Committee members who voted yes included Chairman Clamine, Vice Chair Carls, Vice Chair Betten, Representative McLeod, Representative Olson, Representative Satrim, Representative Schneider and Representative Twyte. Members who voted no included Representative Christiansen, Representative Henderson, Representative Hoverson, Representative Johnston, Representative Van Winkle and Representative Wolf.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Judiciary Tuesday, Feb 25, 2025 8:20 AM - 9:00 AM","oneSentenceSummary","The House Judiciary Committee adopted amendments to Senate Bill 2057, increasing civil court fees as proposed by the Supreme Court while leaving criminal fees unchanged; the committee later voted to advance the amended bill to appropriations by an 8–6 margin.","taxTitle","Judiciary, House of Representatives, Legislative, North Dakota","taxId",28895,"location","North Dakota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6313458,"Committee advances Senate Bill 2080 to update child support enforcement procedures",769,561000,1330000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2387857-1edb81b9af79acf4dbeb0cefd11404fa&start=561&end=1330","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2387857-1edb81b9af79acf4dbeb0cefd11404fa/thumbnail_561000.jpg","/articles/6313458/North-Dakota/Committee-advances-Senate-Bill-2080-to-update-child-support-enforcement-procedures","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6313458-67e1ea6721e4d4690624b2f7c18b6430/orig.mp4?Expires=1771097285&Signature=HGMlq~Dryc9GK-4yKIlWdyHlBMyzNIrZIuT652YoSxVaWrvJGdfdx65FiUGkgY8SoM~bG63PMc1mbfXlTnY12MR1iuC27t0Yx4HIMmMeppSL07YdSJ3x7e-S16IKm-NmBPtnWs7Ch0Q9evroQm4SxuldlnBiSLLNTjRau3SuyfE749imRF49ffxG7pMZoO7YiVB1YIUhoU8kmw2WqIh5yFL2BdDFchO9IlZ~5NygBnSy8MU9h7Yu2gKi8sG1g3geFaa8Bg2giaDXhYTtmdhGR4SK8t-qtRubv4Y506sb1hTrmrH6jM4X0VerAihUM1YaYM9pNquembovulA6Sy1w9w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Judiciary Committee voted to advance Senate Bill 2080, a Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)‑requested measure that updates several child support enforcement procedures.

The bill, presented by Jim Fleming, child support director at DHHS, would clarify that non‑attorney child support employees may ask the court clerk to send notices of arrears or to schedule contempt hearings; replace some references to “affidavits” with “declarations” to accommodate remote filings; adjust how support obligations are managed after a child turns 18; remove an obsolete requirement that offices exist in all eight planning regions; and repeal a statutory provision authorizing a publicly posted “most wanted” list for delinquent payors.

Fleming told the committee the changes “would improve customer service and our program’s internal operations,” and that the provision allowing non‑attorney case managers to request notices aligns the Century Code with the program’s standard practice. He said the department has used declarations in place of affidavits in practice and that the change reflects more remote interactions with customers.

On post‑18 support, Fleming said the bill would give custodial parents a simple path to terminate an extended support obligation if the child no longer lives with them — allowing a custodial parent to submit a declaration to shut off payments rather than requiring a new trip to court. He also described a proposal to automatically end a payor’s child support obligation when parental rights are terminated, saying the current statute can leave support orders unclear and “we just feel that the termination process is gonna be cleaner and more efficient if a termination automatically shuts off the obligation to support the child.”

Fleming described the statutory “most wanted poster” as an enforcement tool the department has never used and said it causes customer complaints because the list is historical and not aged. “We would propose that the most wanted poster be abandoned,” he said.

Committee members asked questions about the declaration language and whether the department would enforce private agreements that extend support beyond high school; Fleming replied DHHS enforces such obligations but does not create them. Representative Henderson said during the roll call that he needed more time to review the measure, stating, “I have no idea what I'm voting on so I don't know that I can vote right this second,” and the committee paused to allow him to review the materials.

After discussion, the committee moved a do‑pass recommendation for Senate Bill 2080. The clerk recorded a roll call and the committee chair announced the motion carried by a recorded tally of 8 yes, 5 no, 1 absent (not voting). A bill carrier was identified at the close of the hearing.","The House Judiciary Committee voted to advance Senate Bill 2080, a Department of Health and Human Services–requested bill that clarifies staff authority, updates affidavit language, adjusts post‑18 support rules and proposes repealing an unused public‑shaming provision.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Judiciary committee amends and advances bill to update court fees; civil fees to rise, criminal fees left unchanged

Committee advances Senate Bill 2080 to update child support enforcement procedures