HARTFORD — The number of motions of filed in Family Court by Jennifer and Fotis Dulos is a red flag to domestic violence advocates, who say the court can be used as another weapon for abuse.

Now, as police continue to investigate Jennifer Dulos’ disappearance two months later, Sen. Alex Bergstein, D-Greenwich, evoked the case at a forum at the state Capitol on how family court handles cases involving domestic violence.

“Jennifer Dulos was my constituent,” said Bergstein, who represents Greenwich and parts of Stamford and New Canaan. “This is an issue that is real and present every day in all parts of state and every community. We need to address it head on.”

More than 300 motions were filed by the Duloses in their contentious two-year divorce battle, before Jennifer Dulos was reported missing on May 24, following what prosecutors call a “violent act.” Data shared by the Judicial Branch on Thursday indicates that the Dulos case may be among the most litigious of all divorce cases in Connecticut.

Only three Connecticut cases of more than 11,000 disposed in fiscal year 2019 had more than 200 filings by the plaintiff and defendants before a judgment was reached.

In the public hearing, lawmakers heard from Judicial Branch officials, lawyers, domestic violence advocates and one survivor. They wrestled with how to improve family court for abuse victims, while upholding due process for all and speeding up sometimes lengthy wait times.

“We just keep hearing from victims frustration with family court,” said Sen. Mae Flexer, D-Killingly, who led the forum.

Michael A. Albis, chief administrative judge for family matters, unveiled a new initiative Thursday that he said will help address these concerns, while legislators contemplated revising state statutes out of concern the courts were not doing enough.

Domestic violence experts say one form of abuse can be deploying the court system to threaten, harass, manipulate, financially drain and otherwise harm a victim.

A woman, who identified herself as Suzanne A. for privacy reasons, shared her experience contending with 14 separate legal actions across six separate courts in Connecticut and New York filed by the father of her child over the past five years. Suzanne’s case has 469 pleadings, she said, also placing her case among the most litigious in Connecticut. Her story was reported by Hearst Connecticut Media in 2017.

“How is it that I continue to be a chess piece in his game in the name of his due process rights?” Suzanne said. “Why I am personally funding his ongoing game and why are 3.5 million Connecticut taxpayers unknowingly aiding and abetting his abuses of me and the very system they support?”

Suzanne recounted the struggle to bring many different judges up to speed on her complex case so they could adjudicate fairly. Albis said under a new initiative, many family court participants won’t have that problem in the future.

The “Family Court Triage” program will bring divorcing couples into court 45 to 60 days earlier than they would have previously had an appearance, Albis said. They will start with a mandatory conference with family services, prior to seeing a judge. Then, each case will be assigned one judge and one family relations counselor for its duration. The judge will also have more authority to determine when to schedule motions for hearing.

“There isn’t really another state that is already doing something like this,” said Albis. “Not only do we hope to reduce the number of motions that are filed by addressing the issues sooner and giving services, but we also hope to have improved scheduling so the motions that do require more attention are scheduled in a logical way by the judge who decides the case.”

Family courts have been testing the “one case, one judge” part of the Family Court Triage program in the Norwich Judicial District through what is known as “individual calendaring” for at least two years.

Most family court cases are resolved in under a year and do not involved hundreds of filings, Albis said. In fiscal year 2019, 93 percent of the divorce cases disposed had fewer than 25 filings.

“We want to address all of the difficult cases, not just the few with an inordinate amount of motions,” Albis said.

Several speakers suggested the court was not taking a strong enough stance against abusive court tactics like “vexatious litigation.”

“My experience has been that materially perjurious litigants are not ever sanctioned in family court,” Suzanne said. “This needs to change.”

Tennessee passed a law in 2018 allowing a judge to stop a former romantic partner from filing frivolous motions against an ex. Texas, California, Florida and Massachusetts have all passed laws to address vexatious litigants, and Canada allows judges to hold some hearings in writing to reduce vexatious litigation.

In the hearing, speakers pressed Albis on the courts response to frivolous motions, which may be repeat motions or contain false claims, but drain the court and respondent’s resources.

“Apparently, there is no real standard — or at least one that is enforced — about what is a frivolous motion, which is why we get cases like the Jennifer Dulos case with 500 motions filed,” said Bergstein, who is now divorcing her husband. “We need a better process so we get to resolution and peace quicker.”

Albis emphasized the significant amount of training on domestic violence completed by judges and court staff, calling more frequent and intense than his training on any other single issue.

But Flexer worried that it was not enough.

“For a decade I have been working to have a legislative mandate, a statutory mandate for training for judge around domestic violence,” she said. “Domestic violence impacts about 50 percent of the cases that Judicial hears in some way shape or form and I think while there are some judges who are incredibly well versed in domestic violence issues and really have a deep understanding, we continue to hear stories of judges who do not have that deep understanding.”

emunson@hearstmediact.com; Twitter: @emiliemunson