The Florida Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday from supporters and opponents of a proposed rule that would create a presumption allowing three-month continuances for male or female lead counsel in a case if they're expecting a baby or new child—unless the other party can show substantial prejudice.

Both sides agreed something should be done about parental leave, but the consensus ended there.

Supporters claimed the rule will curb a systematic, statewide problem with denial and opposition of continuances. But critics said it's too vague and takes discretion from trial judges.

'Not in this way'

Eduardo Sanchez, past chair of the Rules of Judicial Administration in Miami, argued that continuances shouldn't be automatic as some attorneys with a parental leave conflict arrive late in a case when trial has been set. He also noted the rule doesn't properly explain what "substantial prejudice" is.