This case involves a father who petitioned for writs of mandamus after the Lee Juvenile Court found him in civil and criminal contempt for violating a visitation order with the maternal grandmother, sentenced him to 50 days of incarceration (suspended), and later lifted the suspension and transferred a related action. The father argued the court lacked jurisdiction to enforce the contempt sanction without a new filing fee and that the case should be transferred to Coffee Juvenile Court due to adoption proceedings. The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals denied both petitions, holding that the juvenile court retained jurisdiction to lift the suspension of the criminal contempt sanction as part of its prior order and that the father had not requested a venue transfer in the relevant action.
The case concerned petitions for writs of mandamus filed by C.G., the father, seeking to vacate two October 2023 orders from the Lee Juvenile Court in actions involving visitation rights of the maternal grandmother F.H. with the father's children. One order lifted the suspension of the father's 50-day incarceration sentence for criminal contempt arising from repeated violations of a prior visitation judgment, while the other denied dismissal and transferred a related action to Coffee Juvenile Court. The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals denied both petitions, holding that the juvenile court retained jurisdiction to enforce its July 2023 judgment by lifting the suspension without requiring a new filing fee, as the matter was not a new cause of action, and noting that the father had not sought a transfer in the relevant action below.
In K.L. v. M.W., M.W. filed a pro se petition in juvenile court alleging that K.L.'s child had been living in unsuitable conditions and seeking a dependency finding and custody. The juvenile court treated the petition as one for dependency, awarded M.W. pendente lite and then permanent custody, and suspended the mother's visitation. On appeal, the mother argued that the juvenile court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because the petition failed to allege specific facts showing the child was dependent at the time of filing. The Court of Civil Appeals held that the original petition described only past events without asserting current dependency and that later filings could not cure the defect; therefore the juvenile court's orders were void and the appeal was dismissed.
In this divorce case, Mary Friend appealed a Jefferson Circuit Court judgment that divorced her from Floyd Lamar Friend and divided their property while denying her requests for alimony and attorney fees. The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals reversed the judgment regarding the alimony award, property division, and denial of attorney fees, remanding the case to the trial court. The core reasoning was that the trial court failed to make the express findings of fact required by Ala. Code § 30-2-57 when awarding or denying periodic or rehabilitative alimony, preventing proper appellate review. Because alimony and property division are interrelated, both required reconsideration together. The court also directed further consideration of attorney fees on remand based on the parties' undetermined financial circumstances.
The case involved Shana Lane Ellison's appeal from the Chilton Circuit Court's dismissal of her complaint seeking a divorce from Donald Elbert Stokes on the ground that the parties had entered a common-law marriage in 2009. Ellison's complaint alleged that the parties had cohabited as husband and wife for over 13 years, held themselves out as married, jointly owned property, and that Stokes had referred to her as his wife. The trial court granted Stokes's Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals reversed, concluding that the complaint, when liberally construed, adequately pleaded facts that, if proven, could establish a valid common-law marriage and thus stated a claim for relief.
In W.W. v. H.W., the mother petitioned the Morgan Juvenile Court to terminate the father's parental rights to their child, alleging abandonment after a divorce judgment that awarded her sole custody and imposed supervised visitation and support obligations on the father. The juvenile court granted the petition following a hearing, finding that the father had abandoned the child. On appeal, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals reversed the judgment, holding that while abandonment was established, the record lacked evidence addressing the child's best interests, such as the impact of the father's conduct or any plan for the child to have a new legal father. The court emphasized that termination of parental rights requires proof that it serves the child's best interests in addition to statutory grounds for termination.