Stacey X has introduced a pair of interesting bills.
HB995 [1] (PDF format) would require the petitioner (i.e. the person seeking an order of protection) to pay all legal costs if the order of protection is denied.
HB990 [2] (PDF format) would give the respondent (i.e. the person the petitioner is seeking protection from) the right to conduct discovery and to depose the petitioner (the person seeking protection).
Does the second one open up fishing expeditions into matters unrelated to the order of protection and create an opportunity to intimidate the person seeking protection? Does the first one also introduce an element of financial risk that, say, a battered spouse might not be willing or able to take?
Just asking, because I don't know and I haven't studied the law these bills would amend or what problem with the law they are trying to fix.
UPDATE: It occurred to me that the first one might actually be an improvement if the petitioner currently always pays, and this would make it so the respondent has to pay if an order is granted. But I don't know how it works now. Can any lawyers out there explain what this is all about?
UPDATE: Checked the existing law. It says:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, the petitioner shall not be required to pay any filing fees, litigation taxes or any other costs associated with the filing, issuance, service or enforcement of an order of protection authorized by this part upon the filing of the petition. The judge shall assess court costs and litigation taxes at the hearing of the petition or upon dismissal of the petition. If the court, after the hearing, issues or extends an order of protection, petitioner's court costs and attorney fees shall be assessed against the respondent.
Here's what Stacey X's bill would make it say:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, the petitioner shall not be required to pay any filing fees, litigation taxes or any other costs associated with the filing, issuance, service or enforcement of an order of protection authorized by this part upon the filing of the petition. The judge shall assess court costs and litigation taxes at the hearing of the petition or upon dismissal of the petition. If the court, after the hearing, issues or extends an order of protection, then the petitioner's court costs and attorney fees shall be assessed against the respondent. If the court, after the hearing, dismisses the petition, then the respondent's court costs and attorney fees shall be assessed against the petitioner.
So it looks like under the old law the petitioner only had to pay their own costs if the petition was denied. Now the petitioner would have to pay their own AND the respondent's costs, which could now be even more if they hired expensive lawyers to do $50,000 worth of discovery and depositions.
UPDATE: The third semi-related bill [3] (PDF format) in this trifecta would assess all legal fees of the accused to an accuser if the court finds that the accuser "knowingly" makes false accusations of sexual abuse and the accusations are thrown out, and would also hold the accuser in contempt of court. I suppose "knowingly" is the key here, but again this is a bill that could give an accuser and/or their lawyer pause. And what "the court finds" is a roll of the dice sometimes.
UPDATE: CE Petro already covered this last week [4]. I'm a little behind sometimes.