Ex parte S. P. PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (In re: M.S. v. S.P.)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 05/27/2011 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 Reporter o f Decisions, 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 OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011 2100329 Ex p a r t e S.P. PETITION FOR THE WRIT OF MANDAMUS (In r e : M.S. v. S.P.) (Lowndes J u v e n i l e Court, JU-10-74.01) THOMAS, J u d g e . On December 15, 2 0 1 0 , L.E.P. an a u t o m o b i l e a c c i d e n t . ("the m o t h e r " ) was k i l l e d i n The m o t h e r h a d b e e n m a r r i e d t o S.P. 2100329 ("the f a t h e r " ) u n t i l t h e i r d i v o r c e , w h i c h h a d been e n t e r e d on June 2, 2009. The m o t h e r gave b i r t h t o V.C.P. on F e b r u a r y 12, 2010. a dependency M.S. petition ("the child") ("the m a t e r n a l g r a n d m o t h e r " ) i n the Lowndes Juvenile filed Court ("the j u v e n i l e c o u r t " ) on December 16, 2010, a l l e g i n g t h a t t h e c h i l d was dependent because h e r mother was deceased; because her c u s t o d y was i n c o n t r o v e r s y ; b e c a u s e t h e f a t h e r ' s p a t e r n i t y h a d not y e t been e s t a b l i s h e d ; and a b u s i v e t o the mother, instability, child. and On was because the f a t h e r had been had s u f f e r e d i n the p a s t f r o m m e n t a l unable December 17, to provide 2010, stability a t the mother's f o r the funeral, the m a t e r n a l g r a n d m o t h e r t o o k c u s t o d y o f t h e c h i l d p u r s u a n t t o an ex p a r t e order of the j u v e n i l e court entered that same day p u r p o r t e d l y d e c l a r i n g t h e c h i l d t o be d e p e n d e n t and a w a r d i n g the m a t e r n a l grandmother temporary l e g a l c u s t o d y o f the c h i l d . The petition, father moved t o d i s m i s s arguing jurisdiction first because that the m a t e r n a l grandmother's the juvenile another a c t i o n regarding p e n d i n g i n Morgan C i r c u i t C o u r t . That a c t i o n , court lacked the c h i l d was however, had been i n s t i t u t e d a f t e r t h e f i l i n g o f t h e m a t e r n a l g r a n d m o t h e r ' s petition. The father later renewed 2 h i s motion to dismiss, 2100329 adding as maternal grounds grandmother determination, the father Meanwhile, genetic for lacked requested standing dismissal to seek a that filed a January testing of brief the paternity. g e n e t i c t e s t i n g and 5, The in 2011, child support the and of this award; motion. j u v e n i l e court the father father objected to s o u g h t a change o f v e n u e . in the He the dependency a p a t e r n i t y a d j u d i c a t i o n , or a custody on establish the ordered order order then to for filed t h i s p e t i t i o n f o r t h e w r i t o f mandamus. "'A w r i t o f mandamus i s an e x t r a o r d i n a r y remedy ... t h a t s h o u l d be g r a n t e d o n l y i f t h e t r i a l court c l e a r l y abused i t s d i s c r e t i o n by a c t i n g i n an a r b i t r a r y o r c a p r i c i o u s manner.' Ex p a r t e E d w a r d s , 727 So. 2d 792, 794 ( A l a . 1998) . The p e t i t i o n e r must demonstrate: "'"(1) a c l e a r l e g a l r i g h t i n the p e t i t i o n e r to the order s o u g h t ; (2) an i m p e r a t i v e d u t y upon t h e respondent to perform, a c c o m p a n i e d by a r e f u s a l t o do so; (3) the lack of another a d e q u a t e r e m e d y ; and (4) p r o p e r l y invoked jurisdiction of the court."' "Ex p a r t e E d w a r d s , 727 So. 2d a t 794 p a r t e Adams, 514 So. 2d 845, 850 ( A l a . Ex p a r t e D.J.B., 859 So. 2d 445, 3 448 (quoting 1987))." ( A l a . C i v . App. Ex 2003). 2100329 The father seeks a writ o f mandamus j u v e n i l e court t o dismiss the maternal compelling the grandmother's p e t i t i o n on two g r o u n d s . He f i r s t a r g u e s t h a t t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t l a c k s subject-matter jurisdiction over the action because, he asserts, i t i s a custody action. See g e n e r a l l y E.H. v . N.L., 992 So. 2d 740, 741-42 (Ala. C i v . App. 2008) n o t have j u r i s d i c t i o n a c t i o n as o p p o s e d t o a d e p e n d e n c y (explaining that a j u v e n i l e court over custody d i s p u t e s between p a r e n t s u n l e s s emergency c i r c u m s t a n c e s of the c h i l d e x i s t ) . does divorced threatening the welfare W i t h i n h i s argument on t h i s f i r s t issue, the f a t h e r a l s o complains t h a t the j u v e n i l e c o u r t improperly found the c h i l d a hearing on the t o be d e p e n d e n t w i t h o u t t h e a l l e g a t i o n s o f dependency. maternal grandmother lacked conducting S e c o n d l y , he a r g u e s standing to i n i t i a t e that the a c t i o n s e e k i n g t o e s t a b l i s h p a t e r n i t y o f t h e c h i l d b e c a u s e , he c o n t e n d s , he i s a p r e s u m e d f a t h e r u n d e r A l a . Code 1975, § 2617-204(a)(2), which provides t h a t a man i s p r e s u m e d t o be t h e f a t h e r o f a c h i l d b o r n w i t h i n 300 d a y s o f t h e t e r m i n a t i o n o f t h e m a r r i a g e b e t w e e n t h e m o t h e r a n d t h a t man b y , among things, divorce. 4 other 2100329 We must r e j e c t t h e f a t h e r ' s juvenile court maternal grandmother's p e t i t i o n petition seeking b e c a u s e we lacks subject-matter custody conclude that grandmother contains first and argument jurisdiction because the p e t i t i o n filed sufficient m o t h e r , t h a t he h a d h a d i s s u e s and t h a t he was home a t t h e t i m e with not capable of p r o v i d i n g the p e t i t i o n was filed. is a petition to 1 invoke -¬ the The m a t e r n a l t h e f a t h e r h a d been a b u s i v e the the by t h e m a t e r n a l dependency j u r i s d i c t i o n of the j u v e n i l e c o u r t . grandmother a l l e g e d t h a t the over the p e t i t i o n not a dependency allegations -- t h a t toward mental i n s t a b i l i t y , the c h i l d a stable In a d d i t i o n , the m a t e r n a l grandmother a l l e g e d i n her p e t i t i o n t h a t p a t e r n i t y of the child deceased, h a d n o t been e s t a b l i s h e d l e a v i n g the c h i l d and t h a t t h e mother was without a parent to provide her We do a g r e e , h o w e v e r , t h a t t h e m a t e r n a l g r a n d m o t h e r d i d i m p r o p e r l y r e l y on, as a g r o u n d f o r d e p e n d e n c y , an a l l e g a t i o n t h a t t h e c h i l d ' s c u s t o d y was t h e s u b j e c t o f controversy. Under f o r m e r A l a . Code 1975, § 1 2 - 1 5 - 1 ( 1 0 ) ( c ) , an a l l e g a t i o n t h a t a c h i l d ' s c u s t o d y was t h e s u b j e c t o f c o n t r o v e r s y was s u f f i c i e n t t o i n v o k e t h e dependency j u r i s d i c t i o n of t h e juvenile court. However, i n 2008, t h e A l a b a m a L e g i s l a t u r e , among o t h e r t h i n g s , amended and r e n u m b e r e d A l a . Code 1975, § 12-15-1 e t s e q . , and e n a c t e d t h e A l a b a m a J u v e n i l e J u s t i c e A c t ( " A J J A " ) , c o d i f i e d a t A l a . Code 1975, § 12-15-101 e t s e q . The AJJA omitted the "custody i n controversy" ground f o r dependency. See A l a . Code 1975, § 1 2 - 1 5 - 1 0 2 ( 8 ) ( d e f i n i n g "dependent c h i l d " ) . 1 5 2100329 care. Any 2 of those allegations, i f proven at t r i a l , e s t a b l i s h t h a t the c h i l d i s "without able to provide child." that the f o r the A l a . Code 1975, to invoke court. See, 309-10 ( A l a . C i v . App. support, or § 12-15-102(8)a.2. a l l e g a t i o n s i n the were s u f f i c i e n t juvenile care, a parent ... willing education of the grandmother's maternal conclude petition L.L.M. v. S.F., 919 So. 2005) ( c o n c l u d i n g , u n d e r t h e of 2d the 307, definition o f " d e p e n d e n t c h i l d " c o n t a i n e d i n f o r m e r A l a . Code 1975, 15-1, and Thus, we the dependency j u r i s d i c t i o n e.g., would § t h a t a l l e g a t i o n s i n d i c a t i n g a t h r e a t to the w e l f a r e the child were jurisdiction The petition. to f a t h e r f u r t h e r complains having We invoke the of dependency of the j u v e n i l e c o u r t ) . i t s December 17, without sufficient 12¬ 2010, t h a t the j u v e n i l e c o u r t , i n o r d e r , f o u n d t h e c h i l d t o be held a hearing on the maternal dependent grandmother's c o n s i d e r t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t ' s o r d e r an ex temporary order; h o w e v e r , we recognize d e p e n d e n c y f i n d i n g i n an ex p a r t e o r d e r . the parte i m p r o p r i e t y of a A l a b a m a c o u r t s have As we explain below, the maternal grandmother's a l l e g a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e c h i l d ' s l a c k o f a p a r e n t t o assume h e r c a r e a f t e r t h e d e a t h o f h e r m o t h e r i s u n f o u n d e d b a s e d on t h e f a t h e r ' s s t a t u s as a p r e s u m e d f a t h e r . 2 6 2100329 long held that an evidentiary hearing on dependency p e t i t i o n i s r e q u i r e d i n o r d e r t o d e c l a r e a c h i l d t o be d e p e n d e n t . So. § 2d 455, 457 ( A l a . 1986) 12-15-65(d), the 12-15-310(a) & Civ. App. predecessor S.J.R., (construing requirement. "adjudicatory presented In f a c t , hearing" is 484 1975, So. 3d 941 So. 2d 290 (Ala. 12-15-65(d)). The s u p r a n o t e 1, d i d n o t alter former § 499, hearing at which i n s u p p o r t of a dependency p e t i t i o n , 501 that an evidence is and § 12-15- 310(b) s t a t e s t h a t t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t s h o u l d h e a r e v i d e n c e the petition petition i f the or if Nevertheless, inappropriate, p a r t i e s dispute they fail now the respond allegations in to the on the petition. t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t ' s d e p e n d e n c y f i n d i n g , however i s not a sufficient maternal grandmother's We to § 46 § 12-15-310(a) e x p l a i n s a a for a j u v e n i l e court s t a t u t e t o A l a . Code 1975, A l a b a m a J u v e n i l e J u s t i c e A c t , see this of See Ex p a r t e L i n n e l l , 2 0 1 0 ) ; and Ex p a r t e W.H., 2006) merits ( c o n s t r u i n g f o r m e r A l a . Code ( b ) ) ; K.C.G. v. ( A l a . C i v . App. the turn to the basis for dismissing the petition. father's argument t h a t the maternal grandmother l a c k e d s t a n d i n g to i n s t i t u t e her a c t i o n . e x p l a i n e d t h a t the a l l e g a t i o n s i n the p e t i t i o n are 7 We have sufficient 2100329 t o i n v o k e the dependency j u r i s d i c t i o n o f the j u v e n i l e court. A l a b a m a l a w p r o v i d e s t h a t anyone 18 y e a r s o f age o r o l d e r knowledge of the f a c t s a l l e g a t i o n s may initiate petition. We the basis o f the dependency s i g n a dependency p e t i t i o n . § 12-15-121(a). to forming with A l a . Code 1975, Thus, t h e m a t e r n a l g r a n d m o t h e r h a d t h e d e p e n d e n c y a c t i o n by s i g n i n g standing and f i l i n g h e r 3 reach a d i f f e r e n t conclusion grandmother's the a c t i o n . standing to i n i t i a t e regarding the maternal the p a t e r n i t y p o r t i o n of A l t h o u g h , u n d e r A l a . Code 1975, § 26-17-602, any i n t e r e s t e d p a r t y may b r i n g an a c t i o n t o e s t a b l i s h p a t e r n i t y , limitations i n A l a . Code restrict standing specific instances. 1975, t o s e e k an §§ 26-17-607 and adjudication When t h e r e 26-17-609, of p a t e r n i t y i s a presumed father, in the Alabama U n i f o r m Parentage A c t p e r m i t s t h e presumed f a t h e r t o disprove h i s p a t e r n i t y a t any t i m e . § 26-17-607(a). However, i f t h e presumed f a t h e r w i s h e s t o p e r s i s t i n h i s p r e s u m p t i o n o f paternity, no one may bring an action to disprove his B e c a u s e we have c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e m a t e r n a l g r a n d m o t h e r ' s p e t i t i o n i s a d e p e n d e n c y p e t i t i o n , we w i l l n o t e n t e r t a i n t h e father's argument that the maternal grandmother lacked standing to i n i t i a t e a custody a c t i o n i n the j u v e n i l e court. 3 8 2100329 p a t e r n i t y o r t o e s t a b l i s h p a t e r n i t y i n a n o t h e r man. Id. t h e p r e s u m e d f a t h e r p e r s i s t s i n h i s s t a t u s as t h e l e g a l of a c h i l d , neither the maintain action to an mother nor disprove any other 554 paternity."). So. i t s progeny t h a t favor m a i n t a i n i n g unit and the 2d 406 father individual The Comment t o § 26-17-607 s p e c i f i c a l l y s t a t e s t h a t (a) f o l l o w s Ex p a r t e P r e s s e , ("If may Alabama "[s]ubsection (Ala. 1989)[,] the i n t e g r i t y f a t h e r - c h i l d relationship that of the was and family developed therein." As m e n t i o n e d a b o v e , t h e f a t h e r i n t h e p r e s e n t c a s e a r g u e s t h a t he i s a presumed f a t h e r under § 2 6 - 1 7 - 2 0 4 ( a ) ( 2 ) , provides if ... t h a t " [ a ] man he and the i s p r e s u m e d t o be t h e f a t h e r o f a mother of the child o t h e r and t h e c h i l d i s b o r n w i t h i n 300 or d i v o r c e . " The F e b r u a r y 12, judgment. child under on 2010, Thus, § invalidity, m o t h e r and t h e f a t h e r had b e e n m a r r i e d , June 2, 2009, w i t h i n 300 the father and each days a f t e r the m a r r i a g e by d e a t h , a n n u l m e n t , d e c l a r a t i o n o f divorced child were m a r r i e d t o i s terminated were which the child was they born on days of the e n t r y of the divorce i s the of 26-17-204(a)(2), father the pursuant to § 607(a), the m a t e r n a l grandmother l a c k e d s t a n d i n g to institute 9 and, presumed 26-17- 2100329 an action seeking establish to paternity disprove in the another father's man paternity because the or to father has d e c i d e d to p e r s i s t i n h i s presumption of p a t e r n i t y . Accordingly, mandamus we g r a n t t h e f a t h e r ' s p e t i t i o n f o r a w r i t o f insofar as his grandmother's request adjudicated. The maternal that action adjudication. r e q u i r i n g t h e f a t h e r and as a means o f p r o v i n g based on the the v. of the maternal child insofar as the i t requests that juvenile court's order grandmother's a t 2018 action seeking 3d to vacate that order. 460, 463 ( A l a . 2008) R a i n b o w D r i v e , 740 So. (quoting 2d 1025, 1029 ( q u o t i n g i n t u r n B e a c h v. D i r e c t o r o f Revenue, S.W.2d 315, 318 that notices or is App. 1996))) informed j u r i s d i c t i o n must d i s m i s s the that (stating that i t lacks a c t i o n and 10 that we See ( A l a . 1999) Ct. was to i n s t i t u t e d without standing, j u v e n i l e court (Mo. be the c h i l d to undergo g e n e t i c t e s t i n g S h a b a n i , 4 So. S t a t e v. P r o p e r t y the i s d i r e c t e d to dismiss Because the e s t a b l i s h p a t e r n i t y , w h i c h was C a d l e Co. to or d i s p r o v i n g the f a t h e r ' s p a t e r n i t y maternal f u r t h e r d i r e c t the relates paternity j u v e n i l e court grandmother's paternity petition a 934 court subject-matter "'"[a]ny other 2100329 a c t i o n taken by a c o u r t l a c k i n g s u b j e c t matter j u r i s d i c t i o n i s n u l l and v o i d " ' " ) . PETITION GRANTED I N PART AND DENIED IN PART; WRIT ISSUED. Thompson, P . J . , and P i t t m a n and Bryan, Moore, J . , c o n c u r s i n t h e r a t i o n a l e in the result, with writing. 11 J J . , concur. i n p a r t and concurs 2100329 MOORE, J u d g e , concurring c o n c u r r i n g i n the r e s u l t . I the concur i n that part maternal paternity vacate I opinion adjudication in the addressed 5, and 2011, result to the the rationale o f the main o p i n i o n grandmother i t s January concur in in did not have d i r e c t i n g the order the action. 12 part and concluding that standing to juvenile parts grandmother's of seek court requiring genetic remaining maternal in a to testing; the main dependency

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.