| Request Status Summary |
| Request Status |
Awaiting Endorsement |
|
| Request Detail |
| Requestor Name: |
| |
Booher, Jean |
| Origination Date: |
| |
11/05/2012 |
| |
|
|
Recommended Endorser:
|
| |
Washington State Association of County Clerks |
|
| Request Type: |
Change or Enhancement
|
| Which Systems are affected? |
Judicial Information System (JIS)
Superior Court Management Information System (SCOMIS)
|
| Business Area: |
Case/Referral Filing and Maintenance
|
| Communities Impacted: |
Superior Court Judges
County Clerks
|
| Impact if not Resolved: |
High |
|
|
| What is the Business Problem or Opportunity |
Requesting change in JIS to allow the DV Flag field to accept N (No) in addition to its current Y (Yes) default value when initiating a Vulnerable Adult Protection Order (VAP) case. Currently, a VAP case with no family or household relationship between the vulnerable adult and the restrained person does not allow for entry of a protection order unless the DV Flag field is equal to Y (Yes).
The work-around requires (1) initiating the vulnerable protection order petition and setting the DV Flag to Y when there is no family or household relationship, or (2) initiate the VAP petition as an unlawful harassment (HAR) cause of action and setting the DV Flag to N in order to enter a protection order.
|
| Expected Benefit: |
Accurate coding of family or household relationships for VAP cases. Accurate cause of action filing information for HAR cases since VAP cases would not be included in the HAR cause of action filings. |
| Any Additional Information: |
Review of RCW 74.34.110 by AOC Legal Services found there is nothing in chapter 74.34 RCW or RCW 74.34.110, specifically, that prohibits a court form issuing a vulnerable adult protection order when there is no family or household relationship between the vulnerable adult and the restrained person.
A non DV VAP is permissible under the statutes. |
