Rule 13 Continuances

(a) COMMENTARY:

Continuances by the court are rare; usually they are only imposed when a flag sheet has not been presented to the court on time; where other documents (such as proof of service) are missing, the hearing is held and the documentary deficiency brought to the attorney's attention, giving the attorney the opportunity to point out if a document has in fact been filed but not delivered to the file in time. Requiring that flag sheets be filed prior to the hearing should help eliminate a portion of those continuances. Sometimes the deficiency is not one of the attorney's or party's own making; a document may have been misplaced or misrouted at the court. Parties may have traveled from off island or taken off time from work or school to attend the hearing. By putting a brief explanation of the reason for continuance on the court calendar, the attorney can either catch an error or rectify an omission in time to get the matter reinstated at the original hearing time. This would improve the efficiency of the judicial system, and help alleviate the congested calendar, by eliminating having some matters continued over to future hearing dates, which often prevents new matters from being scheduled for those future dates.

This rule would also allow the court to continue the hearing when justice demands; for example, when an heir or beneficiary appears without counsel and may want to object to the petition.

(b) COMMENTARY:

Continuances by the parties are confusing, and there are no standard procedures at this time. This rule provides guidance and certainty to the system. Any party may seek a continuance, but that request, unless otherwise ordered by the court, will be heard at the original time set for the hearing. By using the original hearing date to hear any petition for continuance, the court may proceed with the original petition if the continuance is not granted. This rule also clarifies that the person obtaining the continuance is to prepare, file, and serve an amended order setting time and place of hearing, although the order is to be presented to the court with the date and time left blank for the court to fill in.

(c) COMMENTARY:

This rule would eliminate using a continuance as a means of buying time to respond to a pleading and would increase judicial efficiency by eliminating an incentive to continue. Parties would have to have their cases prepared for the original hearing date and could not use the continuance delay to improve their positions. This rule also clarifies the situation when a specific deadline is set by statute, rule, or stipulation, such as the requirement that overbids in a confirmation of sale proceeding be delivered to the court prior to the time set for the hearing. A continuance for failure to file a flag sheet in time would not give other prospective bidders additional time in which to submit bids.