Carla Allen v. Warren Hill

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Rel: 07/29/2011 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o formal r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS SPECIAL TERM, 2011 2100318 Carla Allen v. Warren H i l l Appeal from Lawrence C i r c u i t Court (DR-04-78.02) THOMAS, In Judge. February 2010, C a r l a modification complaint, ("the Briona father") Allen Allen seeking an o r d e r to pay postminority ("the c h i l d " ) . ("the mother") After filed r e q u i r i n g Warren educational a trial, a Hill support f o r the t r i a l court 2100318 ordered the maintain $100 health per appeals been f a t h e r t o pay insurance month that required the toward her judgment, t o pay on c h i l d ' s automobile insurance, the child, college arguing h a l f the and t o pay expenses. that the The father child's college the to child mother should have expenses. "Our supreme c o u r t authorized the imposition of postminority educational support in Ex parte Bayliss, 550 So. 2d 986 (Ala. 1989). When considering an application for postminority e d u c a t i o n a l s u p p o r t , 'the t r i a l c o u r t s h a l l c o n s i d e r a l l r e l e v a n t f a c t o r s that s h a l l appear reasonable and necessary, i n c l u d i n g p r i m a r i l y the financial resources of the parents and the child and the child's commitment to, and aptitude for, the requested e d u c a t i o n . ' Ex p a r t e B a y l i s s , 550 So. 2d a t 987. O t h e r f a c t o r s t h e t r i a l c o u r t may consider i n c l u d e 'the s t a n d a r d of l i v i n g t h a t the c h i l d w o u l d have e n j o y e d i f t h e m a r r i a g e had not been d i s s o l v e d and the f a m i l y u n i t had been p r e s e r v e d and the child's relationship with his parents and responsiveness to p a r e n t a l advice and guidance.' Id." Bowen v. Bowen, 28 So. 3d 9, 13 (Ala. Because "the g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s c o n c e r n i n g e q u a l l y a p p l i c a b l e to a[n] (Ala. 1989),] court considers discretion awarded motion only whether the college trial App. 550 So. i t 2 abused court its [are] 2d support," 986 this abused w h e t h e r t o award s u p p o r t and, whether 2009). c h i l d support Bayliss[, for postminority i n determining support, [Ex p a r t e ] Civ. its i f i t discretion in 2100318 determining what circumstances 656 of amount the ( A l a . C i v . App. 617, 619 of support case. Berry 1 9 9 1 ) ; see (Ala. Civ. App. As with receipt of oral testimony, court in a educational absence that of are made, provided the that the the by Berry, on So. Wells, denying the trial are F i e l d i n g , 24 So. 468, at court's the any to trial in the findings have been support would 3d 2d So. moreover, court, evidence 2d postminority presumed record 654, So. trial of the 2d 648 579 the correct; judgment an t r a n s c r i p t was approved Rule evidence. college Jacksonville child That available, 10(d), statement Ala. had The the statement State child benefit of the University also spent so such 472 (Ala. Civ. parties R. the App. indicates expenses, i n c l u d i n g t u i t i o n semester. the to or presumed findings 579 factual findings awarding are F i e l d i n g v. trial submitted at the based under have 2009). No of express necessary findings. App. support Berry, (quoting a l l judgments judgment v. appropriate a l s o W e l l s v. 1994) 656). is and was $5,900 on of three scholarships, evidence does 3 that statement the child's room-and-board $663.09 not P., for costs, the textbooks. first The t o t a l i n g $2,356; indicate whether the 2100318 scholarships covered the e n t i r e academic year or only one semester. The She mother earned i s employed approximately at International $42,500 i n 2009, Paper despite Company. the fact that s h e was r e c e i v i n g d i s a b i l i t y p a y f o r f o u r m o n t h s o f t h a t year; t h e m o t h e r h a d e a r n e d a s much a s $ 6 3 , 0 0 0 p e r y e a r i n t h e past. The m o t h e r h a d p u r c h a s e d t h e c h i l d ' s a u t o m o b i l e a n d h a d been paying insurance. to According father typically father totaled child; In earns quarter f o r the t o the mother, i s also $4,774. $106,000. supporting, money to the children, was f o r paying they $80,000 p e r y e a r ; The father's child, the an o l d e r adult that earned. son. He said 4 f o r that has daughter expenses own c o l l e g e who coverage. two other i s self- testified should one He coverage f o r the The f a t h e r that loans i n 2008, t h e monthly father his children for their out at I n t e r n a t i o n a l Paper. $110 b i w e e k l y and a 1 4 - y e a r - o l d "philosophy" responsible he p a i d automobile and expenses. He p a y s f o r h e a l t h - i n s u r a n c e he s a i d t h a t addition child's she had t a k e n tuition employed approximately had earned college-aged the per pay f o r the c h i l d ' s c o l l e g e The his $419 be that primarily expenses out of of h i s children, 2100318 Candace H i l l , he paid the majority s t a t e d t h a t he p a i d h e r with living expenses. M c D a n i e l , was other subject purposes of trial. scholarship to trial ordered court automobile The its mother the father could without a on awarding fact that a f f o r d t o pay undue h a r d s h i p . "very small the child's contends the aptitude that the trial child's failure to college s e l e c t i o n and that should we for reverse athletic Birmingham; Ms. and action $100 per month to abused the demonstrated with month. per child that child's college to the mother, the the expenses award the father's f i n a n c i a l resources and placed consult with financial award 5 in light of of college is error the McDaniel court court the at an trial stipend" a her Nakia this the evidence the with $100 According clear evidence concerning child, that h a l f the monthly assisted had provide insurance, only the Alabama to appeal expenses; postminority-educational- McDaniel father health argues d i s c r e t i o n by Ms. the college consolidated U n i v e r s i t y of insurance, despite such the own college-aged of a s u p p o r t a c t i o n ; t h a t a c t i o n was for her a u t o m o b i l e payment and His a l s o the of education. The mother "much c o n s i d e r a t i o n " the father planning. The regarding mother of p o s t m i n o r i t y on her argues educational 2100318 support and remand t h e cause w i t h court consider perceives discuss to her the appropriate be "undue college that the factors without weight" choice instructions and to the g i v i n g what she child's financial trial failure planning to with the father. As a p r e l i m i n a r y m a t t e r , that the toward trial the c h i l d ' s court has awards long 839, 841 parent 2d based and the 581-82 support and and books, acting may more necessary Wagner, affirmed pay the mother only $100 expenses. This v. A trial than App. the necessaries, to attend Wilburn, court actual 574 may So. require expenses Wagner v . Wagner, 2008) college 2d a of 989 S o . ("[P]ostminority i n c l u d e more t h a n t h e c o s t s o f t u i t i o n include within reasonably we may child Thrasher (Ala. Civ. educational to reasonable f o r the 1990). to father educational room and b o a r d , and b o o k s . 572, court, "on majority." contribute agree w i t h postminority-educational-support board, ( A l a . C i v . App. to tuition, that cannot the postminority be room reaching ordered held should including after court we other expenses i t s discretion, f o r the c h i l d that the determines to attend to college."). a postminority-educational-support 6 trial be In award 2100318 that included monthly automobile-related 989 So. costs award. App. e x p e n s e s and 2d a t 5 8 1 - 8 2 . may be We included W a d d e l l v. among automobile in a other things, insurance. have a l s o h e l d t h a t Waddell, father in the automobile insurance the so child college as T h u s , we total a Wagner health-insurance postminority-educational-support 904 So. long present and 2d 1275, as full-time case health she 1286 was insurance attended student must i n c l u d e t h o s e (Ala. Civ. in an actual obligation, i n c l u d i n g the automobile insurance monthly insurance premiums the coverage f o r the c h i l d , Although that child's tuition benefit from the pursues her or pay benefit of four-year academic standing." "good calculation of obligation. his The postminority-educational-support amount for the the had w o u l d be not mother child been had and regularly approximately n e c e s s a r i l y be room-and-board costs, f a t h e r ' s payment of t h o s e college to in-state, amounts i n the father amount w i l l required f o r the postminority-educational-support father's the for, 2004). The for allotments education. 7 been the paying health- paying $460 p e r for month. c r e d i t e d toward the child expenses while will she 2100318 In fact light that of he the father's is providing children attending that the trial $460 in c o l l e g e , we court abused postminority Although the fact regarding her mother that trial particular support, trial the factor. behalf which court However, the of a the basis circumstances, 729 be So. that his responsibility 864, the for their 869 agree w i t h the weight" less of testified shoulder and that pay educational than i t may, might, what to the pay. support." that the therefore, under other Stinson v. 1998). his "philosophy" majority college educations. 8 on f a t h e r to ability ( A l a . C i v . App. should own what amount the the the the in of consulted cannot or mother parent-child relationship to c o n s i d e r father children to three specifically not ordered the i t s award support "undue had responsive greater in to the postminority i s equal reducing a 2d as father court for Furthermore, was child lack a f a c t o r f o r the Stinson, court the of we trial thought with court had placed presumably be child court the agree trial college plans, The "is the and assistance educational the that father on cannot expenses, i t s discretion monthly referenced his some f i n a n c i a l case. present $460 income, As of the proof of 2100318 the father's college-aged related that father trial balanced assist the requiring providing she was trial not the the had father's the that majority could of considered ever the "philosophy" her w e l l have f o r a l l or parties his with father college to shoulder health the insurance education. We oldest college- determined even h a l f been required his cannot find 1 factors ability to child responsibility f o r the the married. c o l l e g e expenses to b e n e f i t the a u t o m o b i l e and pursues her the court clearly child with testified have p a i d expenses court he paying The would college The and child expenses. the child's "philosophy," child fault by of while with We n o t e t h a t E x p a r t e B a y l i s s , 550 So. 2 d 986, 987 (Ala. 1 9 8 9 ) , s p e a k s o f t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s c o n s i d e r i n g , among o t h e r things, "the standard o f l i v i n g t h a t the c h i l d would have e n j o y e d i f t h e m a r r i a g e had not b e e n d i s s o l v e d and t h e f a m i l y u n i t had been p r e s e r v e d . " The p a r e n t s i n t h i s c a s e w e r e n e v e r married. However, p o s t m i n o r i t y e d u c a t i o n a l support i s not r e s t r i c t e d to the c h i l d r e n of d i v o r c e d parents. Ex parte J o n e s , 592 So. 2 d 608, 610 ( A l a . 1991) ( " T h e r e f o r e , we hold t h a t the 'college education exception' to the general rule t h a t a ' p a r e n t h a s no d u t y t o c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e s u p p o r t o f h i s o r h e r c h i l d a f t e r t h a t c h i l d has r e a c h e d t h e legislatively p r e s c r i b e d age of m a j o r i t y , ' B a y l i s s , 550 So. 2d a t 992, a p p l i e s as w e l l w h e r e t h e p a r e n t s w e r e n o t m a r r i e d a t t h e t i m e o f the b i r t h of the c h i l d and were not m a r r i e d t h e r e a f t e r . " ) . Thus, the t r i a l c o u r t c o u l d have c o n s i d e r e d what the father m i g h t h a v e d o n e r e g a r d i n g t h e c h i l d ' s c o l l e g e e x p e n s e s i f he and t h e m o t h e r had e v e r m a r r i e d and had r e m a i n e d m a r r i e d . 1 9 2100318 the trial child court's clearly exercise has the of discretion aptitude f o r c o l l e g e and secure three small scholarships expect her to enjoy continued assist her in retaining addition, other the m o t h e r and financial with the affirm judgment the the her academic offset college trial Because had to year, we which should scholarships. seek g r a n t s , the remaining education. the managed freshman success, other c h i l d may to child's of for acquiring assistance associated the or here. We loans, In or expenses therefore court. AFFIRMED. Pittman and Thompson, without Moore, P.J., J J . , concur. and Bryan, writings. 10 J., concur in the result,

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.