Opinion ID: 1135679
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: jurisdiction

Text: The DHS asserts that HRS § 587-82 (1985 and Supp.1992) divests the family court of jurisdiction to issue orders concerning funds not in the DHS's budget. HRS § 587-82 provides: Fiscal responsibility. The court, the department, or other authorized agency shall provide only the care, service, treatment, or support, or the payment for care, service, treatment, or support, as is set forth in the budget of the court, the department, or authorized agency and is authorized by law. HRS § 587-82 does not limit the jurisdiction of the court. Moreover, it is specious to argue that the DHS can control the court's jurisdiction over certain matters by simply rearranging its budget to avoid statutorily imposed responsibilities to care for foster children. Once the court is invested with jurisdiction pursuant to HRS § 587-11 (Supp.1992), it may issue appropriate orders to protect the interests of a foster child. The court's order in the instant case was clearly within its jurisdiction, notwithstanding our opinion that the family court erred.