Rule 1915.4-3.Non-Record Proceedings. Trials.

Last amended October 19, 2021 · Last verified June 30, 2026

In one sentenceRule 1915.4-3 governs non-record custody proceedings and trials, providing that an unresolved non-record conference proceeds to a prompt custody trial before the court.

Full Text of Rule 1915.4-3

Text sizeJump to: (a) (b)

(a) Non-Record Proceedings. In judicial districts utilizing an initial non-record proceeding, i.e., office conference, if an agreement is not finalized by the conclusion of the proceeding, the conference officer shall promptly notify the court that the matter should be listed for trial. A lawyer employed by, or under contract with, a judicial district or appointed by the court to serve as a conference officer to preside over a non-record proceeding shall not practice family law before a conference officer, hearing officer, or judge of the same judicial district.

(b) Trial. The trial before the court shall be de novo. The court shall hear the case and render a decision within the time periods set forth in Pa.R.C.P. No. 1915.4.

End

Plain-English Summary

This rule covers the default custody path and the trial itself. In counties using an initial non-record proceeding — an office conference that is not transcribed — a case that does not settle there proceeds to a prompt trial before the court. The rule sets how the trial is conducted so the custody question is decided on the merits without undue delay.

Frequently Asked Questions

What happens if a non-record custody conference does not resolve the case?

The case proceeds to a prompt custody trial before the court.

Official Note

Explanatory Comment. —2018 The amendment to this rule, in conjunction with the amendment to Pa.R.C.P. No. 1915.1, standardizes terminology used in the custody process and identifies court personnel by title and in some cases qualifications. Of note, the term ‘‘mediator,’’ which had been included in the rule, has been omitted and is specifically defined in Pa.R.C.P. No. 1915.1. As in the support rules, custody conference officers preside over conferences and hearing officers preside over hearings. Regardless of the individual’s title, presiding over a conference or a hearing triggers the family law attorney practice preclusion in this rule and in Pa.R.C.P. No. 1915.4-2(b) in the case of a hearing officer. Mediators, as defined in Pa.R.C.P. No. 1915.1 and as qualified in Pa.R.C.P. No. 1940.4, do not preside over custody conferences or hearings; rather, mediators engage custody litigants in alternative dispute resolution methods pursuant to Chapter 1940 of the Rules of Civil Procedure and, as such, the preclusion from practicing family law in the same judicial district in which an attorney/mediator is appointed is inapplicable.

Amendment History

The provisions of this Rule 1915.4-3 amended August 1, 2013, effective September 3, 2013, 43 Pa.B. 4702; amended March 4, 2015, effective in 30 days on April 3, 2015, 45 Pa.B. 1354; amended February 8, 2018, effective April 1, 2018, 48 Pa.B. 1095; amended October 19, 2021, effective January 1, 2022, 51 Pa.B. 6764. Immediately preceding text appears at serial pages (390563) to (390564).

Source & verification. Rule text, the Official Note, and the amendment history are reproduced verbatim from the Pennsylvania Code, Title 231, the official compilation of rules adopted by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Last verified June 30, 2026. · Official text

Also known as: custody trialnon-record custody proceedingcustody hearing