Private Judge, Collaborative Case or Private Custody Counselor: The Private Routes Compared

California offers three main private routes for a family case, and each still runs through the Superior Court. A privately compensated temporary judge is a lawyer the parties pay to hear the case as its judge. A collaborative case is a written agreement to settle without court battles. Private custody counseling replaces court counseling on parenting disputes, and it can sometimes be kept confidential.

Most people facing a divorce or a custody question in Rancho Santa Fe who search for "private" options are carrying a specific worry. They do not want the details of their marriage, their finances or their children's lives to become something a stranger can read or sit in on. They have usually heard the phrases "private judge" and "collaborative divorce" and assumed both mean the same thing: a case kept out of view. They don't, and the differences matter before anyone signs anything.

This page compares the three routes on the questions that decide how private each one really is: who makes the decisions, what stays open to the public, who pays, and what role the San Diego Superior Court keeps. Because a Rancho Santa Fe case is generally filed in the court's North County Division in Vista, the court procedures described here are San Diego's own, taken from its local rules and forms.

What 'Private' Means in a California Family Law Case

"Private" in family law rarely means secret. It usually means that some part of the work happens outside the regular courtroom, run by someone the parties choose and pay. The case itself stays a case in the Superior Court, and its outcome is still a court order or judgment.

The three routes work like this, in plain terms:

• A privately compensated temporary judge (PCTJ) is an attorney who serves as the judge in the case at the parties' request. California Rules of Court, rule 2.830, defines "privately compensated" simply: "the temporary judge is paid by the parties."
• A collaborative case is one where the spouses agree in writing to resolve the matter by agreement. Family Code section 2013 describes it as a process in which "the parties and any professionals engaged by the parties to assist them agree in writing to use their best efforts and to make a good faith attempt to resolve disputes related to the family law matters ... on an agreed basis without resorting to adversary judicial intervention."
• Private custody counseling is child custody counseling with a privately hired counselor instead of the court's Family Court Services, used for disputes over custody and visitation.

These choices fall under what the court calls alternative dispute resolution, or ADR. San Diego's local family rules state that "Except in cases involving domestic violence, ADR is encouraged but voluntary." Under the court's Local Rules of Court, Division V: Family Law, parties who engage in private mediation or arbitration should advise the court as soon as possible, and all agreements reached there must be submitted to the court in a writing signed by all parties. Custody disputes are different, as explained below, because the Family Code requires counseling before a contested custody order. Every route still operates inside California family law, and every route ends in orders the court enters and enforces.

The Privately Compensated Temporary Judge Route

San Diego Superior Court Local Rule 5.2.3 sets the procedure. "A request for the appointment of a PCTJ must be made by filing the mandatory Stipulation and Order for Appointment (SDSC Form #D-008)." A stipulation is a written agreement both parties sign, so a private judge is appointed only when both sides agree. The local rule says the request should be "routed directly to the supervising judge of the family law division." The family law local rules also provide that the request shall be filed within five days of the PCTJ signing SDSC Form #D-008.

Once appointed, the private judge keeps the case. Under the same rule, "the case will remain with the PCTJ until the mandatory Notice of Case Completion (SDSC Form #D-319) is filed by the PCTJ and accepted by the supervising judge," unless the court orders the appointment withdrawn. A request to withdraw the appointment is heard by the supervising judge of the family law division. Orders made in the case remain court orders, and the rules for changing orders after judgment still apply to them.

The cost falls on the parties. The appointment form, SDSC Form D-008 (Rev. 12/25), states: "All fees and costs of the PCTJ are the sole responsibility of the parties." No public fee figure applies; the amount is a matter between the parties and the private judge they choose.

Here is where many readers' expectations shift. A private judge does not make the case private. California Rules of Court, rule 2.834, states: "All proceedings before a temporary judge requested by the parties that would be open to the public if held before a judge must be open to the public, regardless of whether they are held in or outside a court facility." The same rule adds that "The clerk must post the information from the statement filed by the temporary judge in the court facility." The appointment form also has the clerk post a notice of the pending matter in the courthouse lobby. What the route offers is a chosen decision-maker and scheduling set around that person, not a closed door. Other privacy tools, such as keeping your home address private, are separate from the choice of judge.

The Collaborative Case Route

Under Local Rule 5.2.3, "Before participating in the collaborative law process, the parties must file with the court a signed stipulation pursuant to Family Code section 2013." That filing tells the court the spouses have committed, in writing, to work toward an agreed resolution instead of a contested one.

The case is also labeled. The rule requires that "The words 'Collaborative Case' must be included below the case number in the case caption of every document filed with the court." That label marks the file; it does not seal it. Documents filed in a collaborative case become part of the court record in the usual way.

In practice, each spouse has a separate attorney, and both attorneys, along with any other professionals the parties bring in, sign on to the shared commitment section 2013 describes: resolving the matter on an agreed basis without adversary court intervention. The negotiation happens in meetings, not hearings. When the spouses reach terms, those terms are submitted to the court and become orders.

Either spouse can leave the process. The local rule states that the case may be removed from the collaborative process "either by filing a signed stipulation by both parties or by either party by filing and serving a notice of termination," and that "Termination of the process does not require good cause." After that filing, the rule provides that the clerk schedules a family resolution conference and notifies the parties of the date. The case then continues on the regular court track. A spouse weighing this route is often weighing whether the other spouse will stay at the table, and the rule's answer is that neither one has to.

Private Custody Counseling: Confidentiality and the Court's Role

Family Code section 3170(a) supplies the baseline rule: when a pleading shows that custody, visitation, or both are contested, "the court shall set the contested issues for mediation." That step is mandatory, not optional. In San Diego County it takes the form of child custody recommending counseling with the court's Family Court Services.

The court's own information sheet, SDSC Form D-080 (Rev. 4/26), puts the choice plainly: "Before any court order can be made on a disputed child custody or visitation issue, the parties must participate in a child custody recommending counseling session with a court counselor from Family Court Services (FCS) or stipulate to private mediation at the parties' expense." So the private custody route does not skip counseling. It replaces the court counselor with one the parents choose and pay.

The counselor can speak to the judge. Family Code section 3183(a) provides that the mediator "may, consistent with local court rules, submit a recommendation to the court as to the custody of or visitation with the child, if the mediator has first provided the parties and their attorneys, including counsel for any minor children, with the recommendations in writing in advance of the hearing." When a mediator has that authority, the statute calls the process "child custody recommending counseling" and the mediator a "child custody recommending counselor." Family Court Services calls this person the Family Court Counselor, and its Frequently Asked Questions page states: "The parties will receive a copy of the recommendation in writing prior to the court hearing." The recommendation carries weight, and the judge decides.

Confidentiality is where the court and private routes differ most. Under San Diego's local rules, the private route offers a choice: "The private counseling may be confidential or non-confidential as agreed to by the parties." Parents who pick confidential counseling and still disagree do not go straight to the judge. Under the local rules, "the parties must then participate in non-confidential counseling before the matter is heard by the court," either with a private counselor or with Family Court Services. When private counseling produces an agreement, the counselor prepares a report of its terms, and if the counseling was non-confidential, either party or the counselor may submit it to the court. The local rules also make it the parties' job to confirm the private counselor's statutory qualifications and to prepare a formal stipulation and order before counseling starts. The page on custody and the counselor's report covers how the report is handled in the court route.

Domestic violence changes the process. Family Code section 3170(b) provides that "Domestic violence cases shall be handled by Family Court Services in accordance with a separate written protocol approved by the Judicial Council." This is also the exception carved out of the local rule that otherwise treats ADR as voluntary.

How the Three Routes Compare on Key Dimensions

Placed side by side, the routes answer the four core questions differently. Parents trying to protect their children's privacy often find this the most useful part of the comparison, because the answers are not what the word "private" suggests.

In each route, the case remains a San Diego Superior Court case. The private piece changes who sits across the table, or who presides, but not where the case lives or whose orders bind the parties. A private route also does not promise a faster or different result; how a case unfolds depends on its facts and on the people in it.

Where Cases from Rancho Santa Fe Are Filed

The San Diego Superior Court assigns family cases to divisions by ZIP code, and its local rules treat each family court location as "a separate division and a separate venue." Most family law cases from Rancho Santa Fe ZIP codes are filed in the North County Division at the Superior Court of California, County of San Diego, North County Regional Center, 325 South Melrose Drive, Vista, CA 92081.

All three private routes begin with filings in that same case. The collaborative stipulation is filed in it. A request for a private custody counselor is made by formal stipulation and order for the court's signature in it. The D-008 appointment of a privately compensated temporary judge is filed there and, under the local rule, routed to the supervising judge of the family law division. Choosing a private route does not move a Rancho Santa Fe case to another court. For an overview of the early steps, see the privacy-first divorce planning checklist, and for short answers, the site's Rancho Santa Fe questions page.

If You'd Like to Talk Through Which Route Fits Your Case

The choice among a private judge, a collaborative case and a private custody counselor turns less on the labels than on the facts: whether both spouses will sign a stipulation, whether children and a custody dispute are involved, whether domestic violence is part of the history, and which parts of the case a family most wants kept out of public view. A consultation is the place to walk through those facts and see how each route's rules on decision-making, openness and cost would apply to them. The firm practices California family law only, so the conversation stays on the California and San Diego procedures described here.

To talk through how these routes apply to your situation, contact Rancho Santa Fe Family Law Advocates to request a confidential consultation.