What are the most common CLJ related questions AOC has received due to the 2009 Legislation?
A number of questions have been received at AOC regarding the 2009 Legislation and how it impacts the Courts of Limited Jurisdiction. The following is a collection of the most commonly received questions:
- What are the new Cost Fee Codes being created?
- When will the new Cost Fee Codes and BARS Codes take affect?
- When will the new BARS Codes that take effect July 26, 2009 be available for update in the court DCXT table?
- Does the $20 JST surcharge that was added due to SHB 2362 get imposed on Garnishments or Abstracts of Judgments from Municipal Courts?
- Does the JST surcharge apply to Abstracts of Judgments for District Court matters?
- Does the JST surcharge apply to Vehicle Impounds?
- What are the new Court Fees defined in SB 5277 that may be imposed by the courts?
- What do we charge for CDs? ($10/$20/$30?)
- Can a flat fee of $20 be charged instead of $20 per hour for clerk's services?
- Can a fee be imposed for un-archiving cases as part of the clerk's services subsection?
- Can these costs be imposed by Municipal Courts as well?
- Is there a printable list of the Cost Fee Codes that should now be used and how much is to be charged, based on the changes from both SHB 2362 and SB 5277?
- How does HB 1218 affect Contempt of Court cases?
- Where do we send the firearm prohibition notifications?
1. What are the new Cost Fee Codes being created AND 2. When will the new Cost Fee Codes and BARS Codes take effect?
Changes to the Cost Fee Codes due to 2009 Legislation are defined in eService Answer ID # 2094 - . They are listed in two tables per court level, ones that took effect July 1, 2009 and ones that take effect July 26, 2009.
Some additional Cost Fee Codes were added using previously existing BARS Codes. Those codes can be found in the online manual Cost Fee Codes or by looking at the JIS Release Notes for July 1, 2009.
3. When will the new BARS Codes that take effect July 26, 2009 be available for update in the court DCXT table?
AOC staff are now working on the BARS Codes and other changes needed for the laws that take effect July 26th. Additional communications will be sent to the courts prior to the effective date, to let you know when they are available.
4. Does the $20 JST surcharge that was added due to SHB 2362 get imposed on Garnishments or Abstracts of Judgments from Municipal Courts?
NOTE: The JST surcharge changed in the 2011 Legislative session. For more information see the eService Answer 2011 Legislative changes impacting Courts of Limited Jurisdiction.
The $20 Judicial Stabilization Trust (JST) surcharge is only added to the civil filing fees defined in subsection (1) of RCW 3.62.060. Civil filings specifically addressed in other subsections remain at their previously set amounts:
- Subsection (1)(b): Writ of Garnishment or other writ - $12
- Subsection (1)(c): Supplemental Proceeding - $12
- Subsection (1)(d): Demand for a Jury in a civil case - $125
- Subsection (1)(e): Preparation of a Transcript of Judgment - $25
- Subsection (1)(h): Preparation of a record of a case for appeal - $40
- Subsection (1)(e): Abstract of Judgment or Transcript of Judgment from a municipal court - $43
5. Does the JST surcharge apply to Abstracts of Judgment for District Court matters?
NOTE: The JST surcharge changed in the 2011 Legislative session. For more information see the eService Answer 2011 Legislative changes impacting Courts of Limited Jurisdiction.
Yes. AOC interprets subsection (1)(k) from RCW 3.62.060 as only referring to Abstracts of Judgment and Transcripts of Judgment from a municipal court. The phrase "from a municipal court or municipal department" refers to both Abstracts of Judgment and Transcripts of Judgment. The subsection does not refer to Abstracts of Judgment or Transcripts of Judgment from a district court.
SHB 1144 from the 2007 Legislative session added this subsection to RCW 3.62.060. The legislative intent of the as a whole was to allow district courts the jurisdiction to civilly enforce money judgments from the municipal court or municipal department. SHB 1144 did not address enforcing civil judgments in district court cases, only in municipal court or municipal department cases.
Therefore, the filing fee in district court for an abstract of judgment from a district court case is $63, based on RCW 3.62.060 (1) and (2)(a).
6. Does the JST surcharge apply to Vehicle Impounds?
NOTE: The JST surcharge changed in the 2011 Legislative session. For more information see the eService Answer 2011 Legislative changes impacting Courts of Limited Jurisdiction.
Vehicle Impounds are included. Vehicle Impounds are filed using CVF - Civil Filing Fee. CVF includes the $20 JST surcharge.
7. What are the new Court Fees defined in SB 5277 that may be imposed by the courts?
SB 5277 amended RCW 3.62.060 to add new fees that the Courts may charge:
- (1)(g)(i) Preparing a certified copy of an instrument on file or of record - $5 for the first page, $1 for each additional page
- (1)(g)(ii) Authenticating or exemplifying - $2 for each additional seal
- (1)(g)(iii) Preparing a copy of an instrument on file or of record without a seal - $.50 per page
- (1)(g)(iv) Copying a document without a seal or file that is in electronic format - $.25 per page
- (1)(g)(v) Copies made on a compact disc, an additional fee - $20 per compact disc
- (1)( i ) Clerk's services (i.e., processing ex parte orders, conducting exceptional records searches) - up to $20 per hour
- (1)( l ) Receiving faxed documents pursuant to GR17 - $3 for the first page, $1 for each additional page
Existing Cost Fee Codes definitions are being amended to include each of these fees. The online manual Cost Fee Codes will be updated prior to the July 26, 2009 effective date. No new Cost Fee Codes were created due to this bill.
All fees added due to SB 5277 are "at the option of the district court". It is recommended that the presiding judge of each court issue a local written policy, order, or court rule adopting the fees listed in the new version of RCW 3.62.060, prior to imposing the fees.
NOTE: Although SB 5277 specifically refers to District Court Fees, Municipal Courts can also assess these fees. See the answer to question # 8 - Can these costs be imposed by Municipal Courts as well?
8. What do we charge for CDs? ($10/$20/$30?)
SB 5277 added a new $20 per CD cost for creating copies on a CD under subsection
(g)(v). RCW 3.62.060 already had a cost for CDs as $10 per CD under subsection ( j ). AOC has interpreted the language as meaning that the two subsections are referring to two different types of items being copied onto a CD, so there are two different fees.
New subsection (g) refers to optional costs district courts can charge for preparing, certifying, authenticating, exemplifying, or copying documents or instruments on file or of record in the clerk's office. The various subsections within (g) provide the different fees for the different options, including with a seal, without a seal, or placed on a CD. Subsection (g)(v) specifically reads "For copies made on a compact disc, an additional fee of twenty dollars for each compact disc."
Existing subsection ( j ) specifically refers to costs related to duplication of an electronic recording. This fee is $10 per "tape or other electronic storage medium." While this subsection does not define CDs specifically as a medium, it would be included in this subsection of the item being copied is a recording of a proceeding.
9. Can a flat fee of $20 be charged instead of $20 per hour for clerk's services?
Yes. AOC has reviewed the language in subsection ( i ) of SB 5277 and believes it is a reasonable interpretation of the "portion of an hour" statement that allows the courts to charge a minimum of $20 for a service, even if it takes less than an hour to complete. Therefore a flat fee of $20 can be charged for any tasks outlined in this subsection.
10. Can a fee be imposed for un-archiving cases as part of the clerk's services subsection?
Yes. AOC has reviewed the language in subsection ( i ) of SB 5277 regarding clerk's services related to un-archiving cases. The opinion of AOC is that the terms "historical search" and "exceptional search" in this statute are not defined, therefore the courts could consider un-archiving large numbers of cases as either one of these clerk services. Although this was a service previously provided for free, due to the fiscal reality of the state, counties and cities, courts can chose to impose a fee under the authority provided in this statute. The fee for this service is to be determined by the individual court; up to $20 per hour.
11. Can these costs be imposed by Municipal Courts as well?
Yes. There is a specific RCW that allows municipal courts to impose the same costs and fees as district courts. The municipal court revenue statute, RCW 3.50.100 (1) reads: "Costs in civil and criminal actions may be imposed as provided in district court. "
12. Is there a printable list of the Cost Fee Codes that should be used and how much is to be charged, based on the changes from both SHB 2362 and SB 5277?
Yes. Attached to the bottom of this eService Answer are downloadable PDFs for both the Civil Cost Fee Codes that went into effect July 7, 2009, and the CLJ Clerk's Fees that can be assessed by District and Municipal Courts effective July 26, 2009.
Also attached is an EXCEL spreadsheet displaying the Civil Cost Fee Codes, including a line for Dispute Resolution Cost. This will provide a printable version, including the correct total fees, for those courts that charge the Dispute Resolution fee. Simply add the local Dispute Resolution cost amount next to the DRC/DRS codes in the "Fee(s)" column; formulas exist in the "Total fees" column to auto-calculate the totals for you.
13. How does HB 1218 affect Contempt of Court cases?
The only change made to Contempt of Court cases made in HB 1218 is the requirement that jail time be served in "County" jail was removed. Incarceration for Contempt of Court can now be served in any facility. No other changes were made to Chapter 7.21 RCW. All other Contempt of Court processes are defined in this chapter.
14. Where do we send the firearm prohibition notifications?
When a person is convicted of a crime that requires revocation of their right to possess a firearm, send the revocation order to:
Department of Licensing
Firearms Licensing
PO Box 9649
Olympia WA 99999-9999
NOTE: Firearm prohibition notifications that are in PDF format may be submitted to DOL via e-mail: firearms@dol.wa.gov.
When a person is involuntarily committed and a revocation of their right to possess a firearm has been ordered, HB 1498 now requires courts to notify both DOL and the national instant criminal background check system index, denied persons file created by the federal Brady handgun violence prevention act (P.L. 103-159). For information on the web application created to notify NICS and DOL of mental health firearm prohibitions, see eService Answer ID - Reporting Mental Heath Commitments to NICS
RN id: 2103