|
|
13,592
|
|
1
|
DELEGATE RYBCZYNSKI: That the jurisdiction
|
|
2
|
and powers of the Orphan's Court were to be left to the
|
|
3
|
General Assembly as to placement in the future, contrary
|
|
4
|
to every other court now in existence; that is, that the
|
|
5
|
Court of Appeals would go to the new Court of Appeals and
|
|
6
|
right down the line, until we got there to the Orphan's
|
|
7
|
Court and found no provision.
|
|
8
|
Although there is a strong feeling within
|
|
9
|
the Convention that the General Assembly might very well
|
|
10
|
see to this in the future, I can't help but observe that
|
|
11
|
every lawyer I know would be very unhappy to wake up one
|
|
12
|
day to find that possibly all or part of the jurisdiction
|
|
13
|
now in the Orphan's Court would find itself residing in the
|
|
14
|
District Court.
|
|
15
|
This would prove, or could prove to be a very
|
|
16
|
unhappy situation.
|
|
17
|
On an informal poll of many of the lawyers in
|
|
18
|
this Convention I learned that practically everybody feels
|
|
19
|
that the discussions during the Judicial Article section
|
|
20
|
led us to believe that thework of the Orphan's Court would
|
|
21
|
in fact become part of the Superior Court, so that I know
|