Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Domestic Violence Abusive Litigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Survivors, advocates tell committee abusive litigation is a form of coercive control and urge new penalties
Summary
Survivors and domestic-violence experts asked the Joint Committee to pass bills creating remedies for abusive litigation — court filings used as a tactic to harass, control or financially exhaust victims after separation — and to give judges tools to limit repeat, frivolous or weaponized filings.
Survivors of domestic abuse, legal advocates and service providers urged the Joint Committee on the Judiciary to approve H.1594 / S.1205, bills creating specific remedies and penalties for controlling and abusive litigation.
Lede: A large panel of survivors and multiple nonprofit and legal organizations described how abusive litigation — repeated, harassing or strategic filings in family and probate courts — is often used as an extension of coercive control after separation and asked the committee to give judges explicit statutory tools to stop it.
Nut graf: Witnesses said abusive litigation can include repeated motions, fabricated claims, unnecessary subpoenas, improper use of expert reports and delay tactics, and that it imposes emotional, financial and safety harms. Chronic examples at times included hundreds of filings and extended court dockets; witnesses requested explicit remedies, fee-shifting, gatekeeper authority for judges and training for court personnel.
What witnesses described: Multiple survivors gave first-person accounts of repeated post-separation court filings that they described as harassment and control; several described financial ruin, lost employment and prolonged family separation. Domestic-violence organizations said abusers use litigation strategically to continue contact and to coerce victims; attorneys and court reform groups urged clear statutory definitions and targeted remedies so judges can limit filings and award sanctions or fees when litigation is abusive.
Legal and court concerns: Several advocates and judges’ representatives said the proposal should preserve full access to court for meritorious claims while giving judges screening and sanctioning tools. Committee members asked for drafting changes and for additional training resources for judges and court staff.
Next steps: Supporters offered training modules and model statutes used in other states; the committee asked for follow-up language and implementation detail. No formal vote occurred at the hearing.
