When the Courtroom Becomes the Weapon: Understanding Litigation Abuse in Family Law

"The justice system is designed to resolve disputes—not to become another means of exercising control." - Victoria A. Coffelt

A Different Kind of Abuse

When most people think about domestic violence, they picture conduct that occurs inside the home. They rarely consider that, after separation, the courthouse itself may become one of the primary places where control continues.

For many families, litigation is a necessary and legitimate process. Courts exist to resolve disputes, protect children, and ensure that both parties receive due process. Most parents who appear before a family court are simply seeking fair resolutions to difficult circumstances.

But some cases present something different.

In those cases, litigation itself may become part of a continuing pattern of coercive and controlling behavior.

What Is Litigation Abuse?

Litigation abuse refers to the misuse of legal proceedings—not to seek legitimate relief—but to harass, intimidate, financially exhaust, delay, or maintain power over another person.

It is important to recognize that filing motions, requesting hearings, conducting discovery, and pursuing appeals are all lawful rights within our judicial system. Exercising those rights does not, by itself, constitute abuse.

The concern arises when legal processes are repeatedly used for purposes unrelated to resolving the underlying dispute. A pattern of unnecessary filings, repeated relitigation of settled issues, strategic delay, or legal maneuvering intended primarily to burden the opposing party may, in some circumstances, become another method of exercising control.

Recognizing that distinction is essential. The challenge is not to discourage legitimate advocacy, but to identify those rare situations in which the legal process itself is being manipulated to perpetuate abuse.

The Family Court Challenge

Family court judges routinely manage emotionally charged disputes. Every day they must distinguish between ordinary parental conflict and conduct that presents genuine risks to children and families.

That is no easy task.

Unlike criminal proceedings, domestic relations cases often involve ongoing relationships. Parents continue raising children together long after litigation concludes. Decisions made in one hearing may generate future disputes requiring additional court involvement.

Because of this continuing relationship, patterns may emerge only over time.

Viewed separately, each filing may appear procedurally appropriate.

Viewed together, however, repeated filings, persistent refusal to cooperate, unnecessary discovery disputes, continual emergency motions, or litigation tactics designed primarily to increase financial and emotional pressure may present a broader picture that deserves careful consideration.

The Cost Beyond Attorney's Fees

Litigation abuse affects more than legal budgets.

For some families, prolonged litigation can disrupt employment, deplete savings, delay children's stability, increase stress, and undermine confidence in the legal system itself.

Parents may spend years responding to repeated court actions instead of focusing on raising their children.

Children may experience continuing uncertainty while disputes remain unresolved.

Courts devote valuable judicial resources to matters that could otherwise be directed toward families with legitimate unresolved issues.

These costs extend beyond the individual parties involved.

Why Current Conversations Matter

Over the past decade, increasing attention has been devoted to concepts such as coercive control and post-separation abuse. Researchers and domestic violence professionals have observed that, for some individuals, separation does not end efforts to maintain power. Instead, those efforts may simply shift into new forms.

Family litigation may become one of those forms.

That does not mean every difficult custody case involves coercive control.

Nor should every unsuccessful motion be viewed with suspicion.

Rather, it suggests that courts, attorneys, and policymakers benefit from understanding how legitimate legal procedures may, in limited circumstances, become part of a broader pattern of domination.

Awareness does not replace evidence.

It simply helps us ask better questions.

A Role for Education and Study

Georgia's courts already possess significant authority to manage litigation, enforce procedural rules, and address conduct that unnecessarily delays or complicates proceedings.

The question is not whether courts have authority.

The question is whether additional education, research, and policy discussion would help identify patterns of litigation abuse when they arise within the broader context of coercive control.

That conversation should include judges, family law practitioners, prosecutors, domestic violence professionals, guardians ad litem, psychologists, researchers, and legislators.

Each brings a valuable perspective.

Thoughtful reform begins by listening to all of them.

Looking Ahead

As our understanding of domestic violence continues to evolve, so too should our willingness to examine how abuse may present itself in modern family litigation.

The objective is not to limit access to the courts.

It is to preserve the integrity of the courts.

Justice depends upon a legal system that remains open to legitimate claims while recognizing and responding appropriately when its own processes are manipulated to perpetuate harm.

Those goals are not in conflict.

They are complementary.

A justice system that protects due process while remaining alert to patterns of coercive control ultimately serves everyone—parents, children, attorneys, judges, and the public alike.

Questions for Policymakers

Should litigation abuse receive greater attention within discussions of coercive control?

Would additional judicial education assist courts in recognizing patterns of post-separation abuse?

How can courts distinguish vigorous advocacy from repeated misuse of legal process?

Are there opportunities to strengthen public confidence while preserving full access to Georgia's courts?

Author’s Note

The opinions expressed in this article are intended to encourage thoughtful discussion regarding family law, domestic violence, judicial education, and public policy. Nothing in this article constitutes legal advice or comments on any pending case or individual.