Massachusetts Guidelines for Judicial Practice Abuse Prevention Proceedings Guideline 6:06

The District Court, Boston Municipal Court, and Superior Court do not have jurisdiction to issue parenting time orders in a c. 209A action. Where either party seeks a court ordered parenting time plan, the parties should be told that only the Probate and Family Court can issue such an order. Similarly, if the plaintiff asks that the defendant be permitted to contact the child(ren) only if the defendant complies with certain conditions (e.g., counseling, substance use disorder treatment, random drug and/or alcohol screens), the plaintiff should be told that such an order can only be issued by the Probate and Family Court.

In some cases, where the plaintiff requests a no contact order and/or a stay away order, and the court finds a basis to issue such an order, but the plaintiff wants the defendant to have contact with the minor child(ren), the order may be drafted in a way that facilitates contact with the child(ren). For example, the court can order no contact with the plaintiff with the exception that the defendant can contact the plaintiff electronically or indirectly through specified third parties, or, if appropriate, by telephone in order to facilitate contact with the minor child(ren). Alternatively, the distance restriction may be drafted to permit curbside pick-up and drop-off of the minor child(ren). Any such orders should be crafted in a way that does not expose the plaintiff, or the minor child(ren), to harm or risk of harm.

Where the court has found a basis to issue an order prohibiting contact with minor children and the defendant seeks to have contact with those children, the Boston Municipal Court, District Court, or Superior Court should refer the defendant to the Probate and Family Court with regard to the parenting time issues.

Both parties should be told that the Probate and Family Court has superseding jurisdiction regarding custody, support, and contact with minor children, as well as exclusive jurisdiction regarding parenting time.SeeGuideline 12:00, et. seq., Related Probate and Family Court Matters.

If there is an existing parenting time order issued by the Probate and Family Court, and another court department prohibits contact with the defendant's minor child(ren), the court must follow the procedures for issuing an inconsistent order.SeeGuideline 1:11 Plaintiff's Requested Order Will Contradict Existing Probate and Family Court Order.

The fact that a Probate and Family Court order relating to minor children will ultimately supersede an order of another court does not mean that Superior Court, District Court, or Boston Municipal Court judges “are prohibited or discouraged from ordering all other necessary relief or issuing the custody and support provisions of orders pursuant to c. 209A for the full duration permitted under subsection (c).” G.L. c. 209A, § 3.

District Court, Boston Municipal Court, and Superior Court have no authority to order parenting time for a defendant in a c. 209A action. Defendants seeking such orders must go to the Probate and Family Court.

Chapter 209A now expressly authorizes the Superior Court, District Court, and Boston Municipal Court departments of the Trial Court to issue orders regarding minor children despite the existence of an inconsistent order by the Probate and Family Court.G.L. c. 209A, § 3. Courts other than Probate and Family Court are still precluded from setting parenting time schedules or conditions, but are permitted to issue an inconsistent no contact or custody order on an emergency basis to allow the parties time to obtain a hearing before the Probate and Family Court. Often, the inconsistent provision will be a no contact order that would affect an existing parenting time schedule ordered by the Probate and Family Court.

If an inconsistent order issues, follow the procedure set forth in Guideline 1:11 Plaintiff's Requested Order Will Contradict Existing Probate and Family Court Order.