MD · rules
Baltimore City Cir. Ct. Juvenile DCM Plan 7
Once the court issues a scheduling order for a hearing on the termination of parental
rights, the hearing may not be postponed beyond the scheduled hearing date for any
reason other than:
a. The court is unavailable to hear the case on the scheduled date;
b. Insufficient time has elapsed for a party to object to the termination of that
party’s parental rights;
c. Counsel has been appointed to represent a party without sufficient time to
adequately prepare for trial;
d. The court otherwise finds a compelling reason to postpone the hearing; or
e. Parties must submit one or more available dates for the TPR trial within 180 days
of petition filing, absent extraordinary cause to do otherwise.
C. Postponement on the Day of the Hearing
Notwithstanding the other provisions of this postponement/continuance policy, a
postponement may be granted on the day of the hearing when:
1. An attorney, a party or a witness is unavailable because of emergent or extraordinary
cause such as the serious illness or death of that person or a member of that person’s
immediate family;
2. Service of process has not been completed on one of the parties;
3. After a pre-hearing conference convened under Section E.3., the court determines that:
a. A hearing cannot be concluded as required under Section E.1 because the
presiding officer, an attorney, a necessary witness, or a party has pre-scheduled
leave which is scheduled during the anticipated time of the hearing; or
b. The anticipated length of the hearing will result in a conflict with a case that will
take priority under the Revised Administrative Order for Continuances for
Conflicting Case Assignments or Legislative Duties.
4. A court is not available because:
a. Another case scheduled before the presiding officer is ongoing; and
b. No other presiding officer in the Juvenile Court is available to hear the case on
the same scheduled date of the hearing.
5. Exigent circumstances justify a postponement.
D. Postponements Requested by DJS
1. In the event a postponement is requested by a DJS case manager, the following protocol
is to be followed:
a. The DJS case manager is to submit the request to the Clerk’s Office and may provide
3-4 good dates as to when the postponement may be heard;
b. The DJS case manager is to send a copy of the request to the Chief of the Juvenile
Division for the State’s Attorney’s Office and respondent’s counsel of record;
c. The Clerk’s Office will schedule the postponement hearing – giving at least three
business days’ notice – and notify the State’s Attorney’s Office Division Chief and
respondent’s counsel of record;
d. The DJS case manager, the Assistant State’s Attorney assigned to the judge, and the
Respondent’s counsel or that attorney’s designee, shall appear for the
postponement hearing; and
e. The postponement will normally not be assessed against either the State or the
respondent; however, that decision is ultimately within the discretion of the Court.
E. Continuances
1. Except as provided under Paragraph 2. of this Section, if a continuance is necessitated
or granted during the course of a hearing, the hearing will be rescheduled for the next
available day the court sits. Parties in trial, are considered in trial, and every effort will
be made to conclude the matter in an expediated and efficient manner. A continued
hearing shall remain on the docket day-to-day until the hearing is concluded.
2. A continued hearing may be scheduled on a day other than the next day the court sits
if:
a. The court determines that there is good cause to continue the case for the court to
entertain receipt of additional evidence; and
b. The additional evidence cannot be made available on the next day the court sits.
3. Prior to the commencement of a hearing, which is anticipated to take more than a half-day to conclude, the court shall convene a pre-hearing conference on the day of the
hearing to estimate the length of time of the hearing and the availability of all parties
and counsel to complete the hearing after it commences.
III. Interpreters
Md. Rule 1-333 requires a court to provide interpretation services to a party, attorney, witness,
or victim who is deaf or unable to adequately understand or express himself or herself in spoken
or written English. The following policy creates the necessary procedures to guide the conduct of
this business and the general administration of the court’s interpretation services.
1. All parties to a court proceeding in need of interpreter services are required to submit
the prescribed request form for the Circuit Court for Baltimore City. If this is not done,
an attorney normally contacts the Interpreter Liaison in the Clerk’s Office to inform
them that an interpreter is requested for a hearing.
2. The request can be submitted over the telephone to the designated interpreter
coordinator in the Juvenile Court Clerk’s Office not less than 15 days prior to the
scheduled proceeding for which an interpreter is needed, or as soon as the need for an
interpreter is known.
3. The interpreter coordinator is notified if an interpreter is needed for the next
proceeding when the request is made in the generated court order. If the request is
not made an interpreter will not be provided.
4. Upon receipt of a request for interpreter services, the interpreter coordinator shall
enter the request into the court’s automated Interpreter Services Tracking Log; shall
secure the services of a qualified interpreter and follow the established protocol to
enter the information into the Case Management System.
Provenance
- Source
- www.mdcourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-30
- Edition
- 2026-09-30
- Content hash
64934182fa12482bc27ce6ca8e7050139500406b0213d962da7b690d86793084
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.