D.M.P.C.P. v. T.J.C., Jr.

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 12/14/2012 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f o r m a l 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 , A l a b a m a 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, 2012-2013 2110700 D.M.P.C.P. v. T.J.C., J r . Appeal from Covington C i r c u i t Court (DR-06-306) PITTMAN, J u d g e . This i s t h e second time this court. these parties have b e e n before I n t h e f i r s t a p p e a l , w h i c h we d i s m i s s e d a s h a v i n g b e e n t a k e n f r o m a n o n f i n a l o r d e r , we r e c o u n t e d h i s t o r y o f t h e case as f o l l o w s : the procedural 2110700 "On S e p t e m b e r 11, 2007, t h e C o v i n g t o n C i r c u i t C o u r t e n t e r e d a 'Judgment o f D i v o r c e ' i n c a s e no. DR-06-306, p u r p o r t i n g t o d i v o r c e D.M.P.C.P. ('the m o t h e r ' ) and T.J.C., J r . ('the f a t h e r ' ) ; t o d i v i d e t h e i r m a r i t a l a s s e t s and d e b t s ; t o r e s e r v e t h e i s s u e s o f c u s t o d y , s u p p o r t , and v i s i t a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e p a r t i e s ' m i n o r c h i l d , T.J.C. I I I , u n t i l t h e c o n c l u s i o n of the c r i m i n a l proceedings then pending a g a i n s t t h e f a t h e r f o r s e x u a l abuse o f S.G., the m o t h e r ' s m i n o r [ d a u g h t e r ] by a f o r m e r m a r r i a g e ; and to d i r e c t the e n t r y of a f i n a l judgment pursuant t o R u l e 5 4 ( b ) , A l a . R. C i v . P. The c i r c u i t court f u r t h e r a w a r d e d p e n d e n t e l i t e c u s t o d y o f T.J.C. I I I to the mother, granted the f a t h e r visitation rights, o r d e r e d t h e f a t h e r t o pay p e n d e n t e lite c h i l d s u p p o r t , and ' r e s e r v e d j u r i s d i c t i o n t o h o l d ... f u r t h e r h e a r i n g s ... upon w r i t t e n m o t i o n o f either party.' [ 1 ] " I n J a n u a r y 2009, t h e f a t h e r s o u g h t a h e a r i n g on the reserved issues of custody, support, and v i s i t a t i o n , a l l e g i n g t h a t he h a d b e e n a c q u i t t e d o f the criminal offense. Following ore tenus proceedings [ i n February 2010], the c i r c u i t c o u r t e n t e r e d a ' F i n a l Decree Concerning C h i l d Custody, V i s i t a t i o n , and S u p p o r t ' on J u l y 30, 2010, a w a r d i n g c u s t o d y o f T.J.C. I I I t o t h e f a t h e r ; o r d e r i n g t h e m o t h e r t o pay c h i l d s u p p o r t ; d e t e r m i n i n g t h a t t h e f a t h e r was i n a r r e a r s i n t h e payment o f p e n d e n t e 1 The S e p t e m b e r 11, 2007, o r d e r states: "The [ c u s t o d y , s u p p o r t , and v i s i t a t i o n ] terms of this o r d e r , however, are o n l y pendente l i t e i n n a t u r e , and a r e , by m u t u a l c o n s e n t , n o t t o be considered f i n a l . In t h a t c o n n e c t i o n the Court r e s e r v e s j u r i s d i c t i o n to h o l d a f u r t h e r h e a r i n g or h e a r i n g s w i t h r e s p e c t t o the m a t t e r s s e t out below, and t o t h e n r e n d e r t h e u l t i m a t e j u d g m e n t t h e r e o n as t h e e v i d e n c e may w a r r a n t . I t w i l l go f o r w a r d and do so upon w r i t t e n m o t i o n o f e i t h e r p a r t y . " 2 2110700 l i t e c h i l d support; and r e s e r v i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n t o 'set the exact amount t h e r e o f i n some f u t u r e proceedings.'" D.M.P.C.P. v. T.J.C., 91 So. 3d 75, 76 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2012) . A f t e r t h e f i r s t a p p e a l was d i s m i s s e d , t h e p a r t i e s a g r e e d that T.J.C., J r . ("the f a t h e r " ) , owed a p e n d e n t e l i t e c h i l d - s u p p o r t arrearage a i n t h e amount o f $850, a n d t h e t r i a l judgment April a w a r d i n g D.M.P.C.P. ("the m o t h e r " ) 1 1 , 2 0 1 2 . The m o t h e r t i m e l y a p p e a l e d , custody court entered that sum on challenging the award t o t h e f a t h e r . F a c t u a l Background At t h e time of the custody h e a r i n g i n February 2010, t h e f a t h e r was l i v i n g i n h i s p a r e n t s ' home, a t h r e e - b e d r o o m h o u s e in t h e F l e e t a community n e a r Opp, a n d was e m p l o y e d at R e l i a b l e P r o d u c t s Company i n Geneva. full-time The m o t h e r was l i v i n g i n h e r p a r e n t s ' home, a f o u r - b e d r o o m h o u s e i n M i l t o n , Florida, w i t h h e r f i a n c e , who i s a U n i t e d S t a t e s A i r F o r c e r e t i r e e , a n d her three children: 11-year-old and S.G., a 1 3 - y e a r - o l d s o n -- b o t h daughter; D.G., an from t h e mother's p r e v i o u s marriage; T.J.C. I I I ("the c h i l d " ) . The m o t h e r was e m p l o y e d p a r t - t i m e b y t h e l o c a l s c h o o l b o a r d as a s u b s t i t u t e t e a c h e r ' s 3 aide 2110700 and clerical Junior worker; she was also a student Pensacola College. The mother had had pendente l i t e custody of the c h i l d , who was t h e n a p p r o a c h i n g h i s s i x t h b i r t h d a y , half at years. The father weekend v i s i t a t i o n w i t h custody proceedings. Crestview, The Florida, evidence had been exercising the c h i l d during The parties w e l l - m a n n e r e d , a n d shy. twice-monthly been meeting the c h i l d i s good-natured, He h a s h i s own room when he v i s i t s a t g r a n d p a r e n t s ' h o u s e , b u t he i s somewhat and to sleep separate bed. i n the father's has v i s i t a t i o n child's breakfast the with room, where he h a s a the c h i l d , On t h e weekends when the father s m a l l M e t h o d i s t c h u r c h where t h e f a t h e r ' s the father care f a m i l y members The p a t e r n a l g r a n d m o t h e r s t a t e d t h a t , were a w a r d e d c u s t o d y f o r the c h i l d prepares the and l u n c h , p l a y s w i t h him, and t a k e s him t o have l o n g b e e n a c t i v e . if fearful The c h i l d h a s one p l a y m a t e n e a r h i s own age i n the p a t e r n a l g r a n d p a r e n t s ' neighborhood. he in exchanges. the p a t e r n a l prefers and a t h e pendency o f t h e had f o r the v i s i t a t i o n indicated that f o r three of the c h i l d , she w o u l d a t t i m e s when t h e f a t h e r i s a t work. 4 2110700 In addition to her parents, t h e mother has a large e x t e n d e d f a m i l y i n M i l t o n , i n c l u d i n g c o u s i n s n e a r t h e same age as the c h i l d . The m o t h e r ' s parents, are r e t i r e d . place where parents, The m a t e r n a l like grandparents' a l l the neighborhood children, c h i l d ' s two b e s t f r i e n d s , c o n g r e g a t e t o p l a y . that, although the father's yard i s the i n c l u d i n g the The m o t h e r said she h a d o f f e r e d t o d r i v e t h e c h i l d t o s c h o o l , t h e c h i l d p r e f e r s t o r i s e e a r l y a n d f i x h i s own b r e a k f a s t so t h a t he c a n r i d e t h e s c h o o l b u s w i t h h i s n e i g h b o r h o o d f r i e n d s and h i s h a l f b r o t h e r . The c h i l d s h a r e s a room w i t h t h e h a l f b r o t h e r a n d , a c c o r d i n g t o t h e m o t h e r , t h e two a r e v e r y despite said the five-year d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e i r t h a t when t h e c h i l d ' s half siblings ages. close The m o t h e r had v i s i t e d their f a t h e r i n T e x a s t h e c h i l d h a d m i s s e d them a g r e a t d e a l . The c h i l d e n j o y s soccer league s o c c e r and has p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a f o r t h e p a s t two y e a r s . church The m o t h e r a t t e n d s some b u t n o t a l l t h e c h i l d ' s s o c c e r games b e c a u s e she c o a c h e s h e r d a u g h t e r ' s s o c c e r team. The m o t h e r i s v i c e p r e s i d e n t o f t h e middle-school parent/teacher leader. According o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d h a s been a S c o u t t o the c h i l d ' s kindergarten teacher, the m o t h e r v o l u n t e e r s on a r e g u l a r b a s i s a t t h e c h i l d ' s 5 elementary 2110700 school and i s always w i l l i n g kindergarten where she demanding teacher had had been term. for 23 than favorably is raised. had she years, She personal The teacher said, opinion have schools stated a in that the that more Alabama, t o c a t c h up that the The Florida, child after s e v e r a l Mondays a t t h e b e g i n n i n g of child he the speaks t h e m o t h e r ' s f i a n c e , and i t child i s "very Over t h e m o t h e r ' s o b j e c t i o n , t h e t e a c h e r her in s t a t e d t h a t the struggled o f b o t h h i s f a t h e r and evident, activities. schools the on 2 the teaching a v e r a g e s t u d e n t who current with curriculum academic missed school help t e s t i f i e d that where she had b e e n b o r n and i s an to "a c h i l d was should be much allowed loved." to state b r o u g h t up in a church environment." On was cross-examination a s k e d how she) could her retire fiancé by t h e father's counsel, (whom she from the s t a t e d was military at the the mother t h e same age age of 35. as The I n 2009, b e f o r e t h e c h i l d was o f s c h o o l age, t h e f a t h e r ' s weekend v i s i t a t i o n t i m e e x t e n d e d f r o m F r i d a y a t 3:15 p.m. to Monday a t 5:00 p.m. The e v i d e n c e i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e f a t h e r had f a i l e d t o r e t u r n t h e c h i l d i n t i m e f o r him t o b e g i n kindergarten on Monday, A u g u s t 24, 2009, and f o r s e v e r a l Mondays a f t e r t h a t . The m o t h e r f i l e d an e m e r g e n c y m o t i o n t o m o d i f y t h e v i s i t a t i o n s c h e d u l e , and t h e p a r t i e s s u b s e q u e n t l y a g r e e d t h a t t h e f a t h e r ' s weekend v i s i t a t i o n t i m e w o u l d end on Sunday e v e n i n g s r a t h e r t h a n on Monday a f t e r n o o n s . 2 6 2110700 mother responded terminal that Parkinson's retirement. Opposing her fiancé disease had been and had diagnosed received a with medical c o u n s e l t h e n q u e s t i o n e d t h e m o t h e r as t o w h e t h e r she t h o u g h t she was " s e n d i n g t h e wrong s i g n a l t o [ h e r ] c h i l d r e n w i t h [her f i a n c e ] l i v i n g i n [the] h o u s e h o l d and b e i n g i n t h e bed w i t h [her] a t n i g h t . " The m o t h e r was a l s o a s k e d on c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n whether the c h i l d was w i t h h e r . a t t e n d e d c h u r c h when he The m o t h e r s t a t e d t h a t she c o n s i d e r e d h e r s e l f a C h r i s t i a n b u t t h a t she h a d n o t t a k e n t h e c h i l d t o c h u r c h f o r " a b o u t a y e a r " b e c a u s e she h a d n o t f o u n d a c h u r c h i n w h i c h she was c o m f o r t a b l e . The mother's fiancé testified that the maternal g r a n d p a r e n t s h a d a l l o w e d h i m t o move i n t o t h e i r home i n June or J u l y o f 2009 a f t e r he a n d h i s f o r m e r w i f e h a d d i v o r c e d . A t t h a t t i m e , he s a i d , he a n d t h e m o t h e r were f r i e n d s a n d he h a d slept on t h e c o u c h . S i x months l a t e r , he s a i d , he a n d t h e mother d e v e l o p e d a r o m a n t i c and s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p , and t h e y c u r r e n t l y had p l a n s t o marry. the c h i l d The The f i a n c e s t a t e d t h a t he l o v e d "as i f [ t h e c h i l d ] were trial [ h i s ] own." c o u r t ' s c u s t o d y award states: "The c a r e , c u s t o d y a n d c o n t r o l o f s a i d c h i l d s h o u l d be, and i t hereby i s , awarded unto [ t h e 7 2110700 f a t h e r ] , t o be e x e r c i s e d i n t h e home o f h i s p a r e n t s , paren w h e r e v e r t h e y may e l e c t to reside. S c a n l a n v. R o w i n s k y , 611 So. 2d 1092 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1992). "The C o u r t h a s , o f c o u r s e , c o n s i d e r e d an a w a r d of joint custody as r e q u i r e d by Ala. Code § 30-3-152, b u t i t t h e r e u p o n awards t h e f o r m o f c u s t o d y d e t e r m i n e d t o be i n t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s o f the p a r t i e s ' c h i l d , which i s always the c o u r t ' s primary concern. " O b v i o u s l y , t h e above a w a r d o f c u s t o d y does r e p r e s e n t an a l t e r a t i o n o f t h e t e m p o r a r y c u s t o d i a l s t a t u s h e r e t o f o r e e x i s t i n g . However, t h e b e n e f i t s t h e r e o f u n t o t h e c h i l d o u t w e i g h any d i s r u p t i o n i n his life caused by the alteration, and such a l t e r a t i o n w i l l l i k e w i s e m a t e r i a l l y promote h i s b e s t interests. " M o r e o v e r , t h e r e have b e e n m a t e r i a l c h a n g e s i n the circumstances of the p a r t i e s s i n c e the temporary c u s t o d y o r d e r s ( s u p e r s e d e d h e r e b y ) came i n t o e f f e c t , and t h o s e c h a n g e s a r e s u f f i c i e n t t o j u s t i f y t h e C o u r t i n p r o c e e d i n g as i t does i n t h i s d e c r e e . " Standard of Review The m o t h e r s u g g e s t s t h a t a d e f e r e n t i a l s t a n d a r d o f r e v i e w is inappropriate in elapsed between the this custody c u s t o d y o r d e r o f J u l y 30, the trial listened indication court to tape case hearing 2010, " c o u l d not recordings because the the months court's t i m e , she testimony There c o u r t was The J u l y 30, 2010, 8 six trial trial." i n the r e c o r d t h a t the t r i a l remember t h e t r i a l t e s t i m o n y . the d u r i n g which remember of and almost says, ... and is no unable to order merely 2110700 states: issues, "The c o u r t , i n o r d e r has again listened t o g a i n a g r e a t e r grasp to the entire of the testimony as p r e s e n t e d on F e b r u a r y 9, 2010, h a v i n g done s o b y r e s o r t t o t h e c o u r t r e p o r t e r ' s tape recordings thereof." We c o n c l u d e that o u r s t a n d a r d o f r e v i e w i s as s t a t e d i n Ex p a r t e Fann, 810 So. 2d 6 3 1 , 633 ( A l a . 2 0 0 1 ) : "When [an a p p e l l a t e c o u r t ] r e v i e w s a t r i a l c o u r t ' s c h i l d - c u s t o d y d e t e r m i n a t i o n t h a t was b a s e d upon e v i d e n c e p r e s e n t e d o r e t e n u s , we presume t h e t r i a l court's decision is correct: '"A custody d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f t h e t r i a l c o u r t e n t e r e d upon o r a l testimony i s accorded a presumption of c o r r e c t n e s s on a p p e a l , a n d we w i l l not reverse unless the e v i d e n c e so f a i l s t o s u p p o r t t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n t h a t i t i s p l a i n l y a n d p a l p a b l y wrong Ex p a r t e P e r k i n s , 646 So. 2d 46, 47 ( A l a . 1 9 9 4 ) , q u o t i n g P h i l l i p s v. P h i l l i p s , 622 So. 2d 410, 412 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1993) ( c i t a t i o n s o m i t t e d ) . T h i s p r e s u m p t i o n i s b a s e d on t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s unique p o s i t i o n t o d i r e c t l y observe t h e w i t n e s s e s and t o assess t h e i r demeanor and c r e d i b i l i t y . This opportunity to observe witnesses i s especially important in child-custody cases. 'In c h i l d custody cases e s p e c i a l l y , t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f an a t t e n t i v e trial judge i s of great importance.' W i l l i a m s v. W i l l i a m s , 402 So. 2d 1029, 1032 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1981). I n r e g a r d t o custody d e t e r m i n a t i o n s , t h i s Court has a l s o s t a t e d : ' I t i s a l s o w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t i n t h e absence o f s p e c i f i c f i n d i n g s o f f a c t , a p p e l l a t e c o u r t s w i l l assume t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t made t h o s e f i n d i n g s necessary t o support i t s j u d g m e n t , u n l e s s s u c h f i n d i n g s w o u l d be c l e a r l y erroneous.' Ex p a r t e B r y o w s k y , 676 So. 2d 1322, 1324 ( A l a . 1 9 9 6 ) . " 9 2110700 Discussion The m o t h e r r a i s e s s e v e r a l a r g u m e n t s on a p p e a l t h a t can d i s t i l l e d i n t o f o u r i s s u e s , n a m e l y : (I) w h e t h e r t h e f a t h e r required t o meet t h e 455 So. 2d 863 the child; standard set (Ala. 1984), i n order (II) whether the adverse to the to i t perceived (III) that whether the t r i a l requires the court father to exercise was McLendon, erroneously of ignored gave undue w e i g h t adverse to the mother; judgment i s f l a w e d because i t his custodial rights home o f t h e p a t e r n a l g r a n d p a r e n t s ; and court's parte awarded c u s t o d y f a t h e r and t o be court's i n Ex t o be trial e v i d e n c e t h a t was evidence out be in (IV) w h e t h e r t h e the trial judgment w i t h s t a n d s s c r u t i n y under a " b e s t - i n t e r e s t s " standard. We will address those issues in turn. I. Citing Rich v. Rich, 887 So. 2d 289 2004), the mother contends t h a t , d e s p i t e September 11, 2007, custody, the t r i a l considered the awarding court evidently t h e a w a r d t o be one McLendon s t a n d a r d t h a t the order (and, (Ala. the her she Civ. App. language of "pendente says, the lite" correctly) of "temporary" custody to which applied. The mother f u r t h e r f a t h e r d i d n o t meet t h e McLendon 10 standard. contends 2110700 Rich in i s distinguishable. that case were awards The s u c c e s s i v e of "temporary" custody custody "permanent c u s t o d y s u b j e c t t o c h a n g e , " Ex p a r t e 2d 276, 278 ( A l a . 1994) awards J.P., or 641 So. b e c a u s e t h e y "were n o t made the 'pendency o f t h e [ e x i s t i n g ] l i t i g a t i o n ' 887 So. 2d a t 300 ( q u o t i n g J.P., i n mind." with Rich, 641 So. 2d a t 2 7 8 ) . " I n s t e a d , e a c h o f t h o s e j u d g m e n t s was a c u s t o d y a w a r d made b y t h e t r i a l c o u r t i n s u c h a manner as t o a l l o w more f a c t s t o be d e v e l o p e d i . e . , t o a l l o w a t r i a l p e r i o d w i t h t h e c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t a n d t o make i t p o s s i b l e t o b a s e a n y s u b s e q u e n t change i n c u s t o d y on t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e p a r t i e s ' r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t developed during that period." R i c h , 887 So. 2d a t 300. I n c o n t r a s t , t h e S e p t e m b e r 1 1 , 2007, order i n the present because i t was litigation c a s e was a p e n d e n t e l i t e made i n mind with t h e pendency litigation that of custody the awaited award existing only the r e s o l u t i o n o f c r i m i n a l charges a g a i n s t t h e f a t h e r and n o t t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f new f a c t s r e g a r d i n g t h e p a r t i e s ' r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The mother argues t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s s t a t e m e n t i n i t s S e p t e m b e r 1 1 , 2007, o r d e r and that the court would s e t a hearing r e n d e r a c u s t o d y j u d g m e n t "upon w r i t t e n m o t i o n o f e i t h e r party" a c t u a l l y makes the pendente lite custody award a " ' p r i o r j u d i c i a l d e c r e e ' f o r p u r p o s e s o f McLendon," R i c h , 887 11 2110700 So. 2d a t 300, because, she s a y s , t h e t r i a l court's language s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e S e p t e m b e r 11, 2007, c u s t o d y a w a r d was unless either modification. p a r t y was We successful disagree. The in petitioning September 11, final for i t s 2007, order states: "[T]he Court r e s e r v e s j u r i s d i c t i o n to h o l d a f u r t h e r h e a r i n g or h e a r i n g s w i t h r e s p e c t to the matters s e t o u t b e l o w , and t o t h e n r e n d e r t h e u l t i m a t e j u d g m e n t t h e r e o n as t h e e v i d e n c e may w a r r a n t . I t w i l l go f o r w a r d and do so upon w r i t t e n m o t i o n o f e i t h e r party." The trial c o u r t ' s statement that i t would set a hearing " r e n d e r t h e u l t i m a t e j u d g m e n t ... as t h e e v i d e n c e may i n d i c a t e s t h a t the t r i a l and warrant" c o u r t r e c o g n i z e d t h a t i t had not y e t e n t e r e d a f i n a l c u s t o d y a w a r d and t h a t a h e a r i n g on t h e m a t t e r would be set upon notification by f a t h e r ' s c r i m i n a l charges had been The governed time. mother n e x t by She that party that p o i n t s out that in effect t h i r d s of the c h i l d ' s "[P]endente l i t e Sims v. Sims, the the resolved. the p r e s e n t case should t h e McLendon s t a n d a r d b e c a u s e o f t h e p a s s a g e award remained rule." argues either September 11, 2007, f o r t h r e e and a h a l f y e a r s be of custody two- life. o r d e r s ... do n o t a c t i v a t e t h e McLendon 515 So. 2d 1, 3 12 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1987). 2110700 " I f t h e r e has been a g r a n t o f p r i m a r y p h y s i c a l c u s t o d y t o one p a r t y , t h e n McLendon a p p l i e s ; i f n o t , the 'best i n t e r e s t ' standard a p p l i e s . Ex p a r t e C o u c h , 521 So. 2d 987 ( A l a . 1988) . The [September 11, 2007,] o r d e r d i d n o t a c t i v a t e t h e McLendon r u l e , b e c a u s e i t was a p e n d e n t e l i t e o r d e r . '[A] p e n d e n t e l i t e o r d e r , whether e n t e r e d ex p a r t e o r a f t e r n o t i c e and hearing, clearly envisions a temporary disposition of custody pending a later final determination of the custody d i s p u t e . ' Sims v. S i m s , 515 So. 2d 1, 2 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1987) . The [September 1 1 , 2007,] o r d e r i n d i c a t e s that the [mother] was g r a n t e d c u s t o d y p e n d i n g t r i a l , a f t e r w h i c h t h e c o u r t w o u l d make a f i n a l determination regarding custody. ' I t i s well settled that a p e n d e n t e l i t e o r d e r c h a n g i n g c u s t o d y does n o t s h i f t t h e b u r d e n o f m e e t i n g t h e McLendon s t a n d a r d t o t h e p a r e n t who t e m p o r a r i l y l o s e s c u s t o d y b y v i r t u e o f t h a t o r d e r . See T.L.L. v. T.F.L., J r . , 580 So. 2d 1359 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 9 1 ) ; Sims v. S i m s , 515 So.2d 1 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 8 7 ) . ' D.P.M. v. D.B., 669 So. 2d 1 9 1 , 194 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 9 5 ) . " C.M.L. v . L.S.M., 680 So. 2d 375, 377 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 9 6 ) . T h i s c o u r t h a s p r e v i o u s l y r e j e c t e d t h e argument t h a t t h e passage o f time between t h e e n t r y o f a pendente l i t e custody order to the and t h e f i n a l noncustodial standard. App. parent custody award the burden See G r a n t v . G r a n t , somehow of meeting 820 So. 2d shifts the McLendon 824, 825 ( A l a . C i v . 2001). To t h e e x t e n t t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t p u r p o r t e d t o a p p l y t h e McLendon standard, harmless, because, i t erred. as we discuss 13 Such error infra, was, the t r i a l however, court's 2110700 j u d g m e n t i s due t o be a f f i r m e d under the l e s s s t r i n g e n t i n t e r e s t s standard. (Ala. C i v . App. McLendon See 2004) standard Rehfeld v. R o t h , 885 to a 2d 791, 795 error i n applying ( s t a t i n g t h a t any So. the custody-modification harmless e r r o r because the trial court's petition that standard); 1995) the (noting standard ... had met v. J . P . F . , 668 I.M. petitioner So. 2d 843, that "the rather McLendon than trial the because the court's 'best e r r o r i n that regard the court standard that necessarily best-interests 845 (Ala. Civ. applied the App. McLendon i n t e r e s t ' standard, i s more s t r i n g e n t , is was determination t h e p e t i t i o n e r had s a t i s f i e d t h e McLendon s t a n d a r d meant best- the but trial harmless"). II. The mother argues t h a t the indicating pay with court ignored (a) t h a t t h e f a t h e r had v i o l a t e d p r e v i o u s pendente personal trial lite property a petition child to her; support and to evidence orders deliver (b) t h a t t h e f a t h e r had t o be to modify the visitation certain served schedule before agreed to r e t u r n the c h i l d to the mother's c u s t o d y i n time begin kindergarten several on Monday m o r n i n g , A u g u s t 24, Mondays a f t e r t h a t ; and 14 (c) that 2009, and i t was not to in he to for the 2110700 best interests siblings. accorded The the court trial a to her trial child mother to dismissed arrearage court's Nor the his trial half court fiancé i n the attendance. ignore evidence pendente indicating lite arrearage the See j u d g m e n t on A p r i l failed property to the beginning of the t r i a l failed to as to r e n d i t i o n and 11, the mother. certain father i n February 2010 that items property mother. The t r i a l c o u r t c o u l d have c o n c l u d e d 15 trial day to that personal at the neglected s t a t e d t h a t he the complains of t h a t he had brought a b o u t w h i c h t h e m o t h e r now him the indicating acknowledged t o t r a n s f e r t h e p r o p e r t y t o t h e m o t h e r and with of 3d 2012. deliver The amount e n t r y of the court ignore evidence to determine D.M.P.C.P. v. T.J.C., 91 So. agreement r e s u l t e d i n the d i d the t r i a l had appeal support. was but first child that the parties' f a t h e r had the of her church mother's from because amount o f t h e a r r e a r a g e . The that presence pay the him i n f a c t , expressly determined that there c o u r t had, 76. the to separate argues irregular failed child-support at to also c o u r t d i d not f a t h e r had This the undue w e i g h t h o u s e h o l d and The of deliver that both to had the issues had b e e n r e s o l v e d t o the 2110700 mother's satisfaction predominately and should not i n the court's child-custody have figured determination. The m o t h e r a r g u e s t h a t t h e f a t h e r o f f e r e d a "lame e x c u s e " for failing to return the c h i l d that the c h i l d 2009-2010 s c h o o l t e r m . not known when t h e s c h o o l he had learned he had year that agreed so of The f a t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t he h a d started i n Florida the c h i l d Mondays when t h e f a t h e r h a d b e e n rights, periods at the beginning could attend kindergarten the when from v i s i t a t i o n had missed and t h a t , school on exercising his visitation t o modify the v i s i t a t i o n schedule b e c a u s e t o do o t h e r w i s e w o u l d , he s a i d , "mess up [ t h e c h i l d ' s ] academics." The t r i a l a first-time parent the mother concerning "[I]t had i s the province to give the father, of a school-age c h i l d not the c h i l d , c o u r t was e n t i t l e d regularly a n d one w i t h whom communicated issues t h e b e n e f i t o f t h e d o u b t on t h i s i s s u e . of the t r i a l court, not of t h i s ... t o make c r e d i b i l i t y d e t e r m i n a t i o n s . " So. about court, Sims v. S i m s , 85 3d 407, 412 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2 0 1 1 ) . The mother's child from facts that arguments his half she was with siblings respect to separating the and w e i g h i n g cohabiting 16 with her against her the fiancé and n o t 2110700 regularly attending church present more s e r i o u s i s s u e s , they are i s s u e s f o r which the t r i a l to weigh the evidence as i t saw c o u r t had but the p r e r o g a t i v e f i t w i t h i n the l i m i t s of i t s discretion. "A d e t e r m i n a t i o n as t o t h e w e i g h t t o be given testimony presented to a t r i a l court while that c o u r t i s s i t t i n g as a t r i e r o f f a c t i s f u l l y w i t h i n t h e d i s c r e t i o n o f t h e c o u r t s i n c e one o f t h e p r i m a r y f u n c t i o n s of a t r i e r of f a c t i s to weigh the evidence before i t and reach i t s conclusions a c c o r d i n g to the weight g i v e n to each p o r t i o n of evidence presented." Stewart v. 1977). Stewart, It 354 i s within So. the 2d 816, (Ala. Civ. of province 821-22 trial the " ' a s s i g n such weight to v a r i o u s aspects reasonably Prop. may have Owners' A s s ' n v. App. 2011) So. 2d 982, the trial evidence, In Moon, 86 (quoting M i l l e r 990 ... Ex ... , w h i c h we parte 3d Vestlake 359, 367 ... are Devine, 2005)). we would Cmtys. (Ala. Civ. "'In order to have to 398 So. 2d 686 (Ala. 941 reverse reweigh [ n o t ] a l l o w e d t o do.'" to as i t v. A s s o c i a t e d G u l f L a n d C o r p . , ( A l a . C i v . App. court So. court of the evidence deemed a p p r o p r i a t e . ' " App. the Id. 1981), our supreme c o u r t h e l d t h a t , i n d e t e r m i n i n g t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s and welfare the of individual a child, the f a c t s of each trial case: 17 court must consider 2110700 " [ T ] h e c o u r t must ... c o n s i d e r t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and needs o f e a c h c h i l d , i n c l u d i n g t h e i r e m o t i o n a l , s o c i a l , m o r a l , m a t e r i a l and e d u c a t i o n a l needs; t h e r e s p e c t i v e home e n v i r o n m e n t s o f f e r e d b y t h e p a r t i e s ; the characteristics of those seeking custody, including age, c h a r a c t e r , stability, m e n t a l and p h y s i c a l h e a l t h ; t h e c a p a c i t y and i n t e r e s t o f each parent t o provide f o r the emotional, s o c i a l , moral, m a t e r i a l a n d e d u c a t i o n a l needs o f t h e c h i l d r e n ; t h e interpersonal r e l a t i o n s h i p between each c h i l d and each p a r e n t ; t h e i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e c h i l d r e n ; t h e e f f e c t on t h e c h i l d o f d i s r u p t i n g o r c o n t i n u i n g an e x i s t i n g c u s t o d i a l status; the p r e f e r e n c e o f each c h i l d , i f the c h i l d i s of sufficient age a n d m a t u r i t y ; the report and recommendation o f any e x p e r t w i t n e s s e s o r o t h e r independent i n v e s t i g a t o r ; available alternatives; and any o t h e r r e l e v a n t m a t t e r t h e e v i d e n c e may disclose." 398 So. 2d a t 696-97. B a s e d on D e v i n e , t h e t r i a l authorized to consider, needs" o f t h e c h i l d , by the p a r t i e s , " among o t h e r factors, the "moral "the respective home e n v i r o n m e n t s and " t h e c a p a c i t y ... o f e a c h p r o v i d e f o r t h e ... m o r a l needs o f t h e c h i l d [ ] . " The mother c i t e s a u t h o r i t y that a parent's that triggers c o u r t was ... offered parent to Id. standing f o rthe proposition s e x u a l m i s c o n d u c t may n o t s e r v e a s a factor a change i n c u s t o d y when t h e r e c o r d l a c k s a n y e v i d e n c e i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e misconduct has had a d e t r i m e n t a l e f f e c t on t h e c h i l d . Clark, The c a s e s c i t e d b y t h e m o t h e r 564 So. 2d 982 (Ala. C i v . App. 1 9 9 0 ) , 18 Wade v. and Smith v. 2110700 S m i t h , 464 seeking So. 2d 97 ( A l a . C i v . App. t o m o d i f y an i n i t i a l 1984) be considered award u n l e s s effect on the child. factor sexual character, without detrimental to the conduct a that See 2002) t h a t w i f e had before she separated 2d 963 ( A l a . C i v . App. consider, t h a t t h e w i f e had a the to may custody detrimental parent's conduct has H e a d r i c k v. H e a d r i c k , (holding that evidence the consider that been 845 So. supported c h i l d t o husband, d e s p i t e been c h i l d ' s p r i m a r y c a r e t a k e r , c o m m i t t e d a d u l t e r y and could initial caselaw suggests that i t relates showing child. ( A l a . C i v . App. as c u s t o d y award of t h r e e - y e a r - o l d fact sexual misconduct i n m a k i n g an In f a c t , our actions mother c i t e s i n an i n i t i a l c u s t o d y d e t e r m i n a t i o n , parent's 2d 823 a The t h a t c o n d u c t i s shown t o have had t r i a l c o u r t may, a as concern c u s t o d y award. no a u t h o r i t y i n d i c a t i n g t h a t a p a r e n t ' s not the when w i f e became p r e g n a n t w i t h p a r a m o u r ' s c h i l d f r o m h u s b a n d ) ; Graham v. Graham, 640 1994) ( i n d i c a t i n g t h a t the t r i a l i n m a k i n g an initial custody So. court determination, committed a d u l t e r y d u r i n g the course of marriage); and B a t e s v. B a t e s , App.1996) (stating that a 678 trial 19 So.2d 1160, court may 1162 the (Ala. Civ. consider, among 2110700 other things, a parent's c h a r a c t e r when deciding issue of custody). III. The flawed mother m a i n t a i n s t h a t t h e t r i a l because i t requires c o u r t ' s judgment i s the father to exercise h i s c u s t o d i a l r i g h t s i n t h e home o f t h e p a t e r n a l g r a n d p a r e n t s , who were n o n p a r t i e s t o t h e d i v o r c e a c t i o n . portion o f i t s judgment, Rowinsky, which court cited conditioned trial judge awarded on h i s e x e r c i s i n g grandmother. distinguishable custody The m o t h e r because both custody of that Scanlan 611 So. 2d 1092 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 9 2 ) , t h e same paternal the t r i a l In support a case i n to a father, i n t h e home contends v. of the that Scanlan i s sets of grandparents had been made p a r t i e s t o t h e d i v o r c e a c t i o n i n t h a t c a s e , w h e r e a s t h e paternal grandparents proceeding i n t h i s were n o t made p a r t i e s case. to the divorce A c c o r d i n g l y , she a r g u e s , court's judgment i n the present custody award t o a n o n p a r t y case the t r i a l r e p r e s e n t s a de that violated her r i g h t facto t o due process of law. N e i t h e r Scanlan n o r t h e p r e s e n t case r e p r e s e n t s a custody award t o a g r a n d p a r e n t . I n each 20 case, the father a l o n e was 2110700 awarded custody. The party Scanlan is a distinction status without of the grandmother a difference. That because n e i t h e r the c u s t o d y award i n S c a n l a n nor the award i n t h i s case o r d e r e d a g r a n d p a r e n t doing anything. on the father's position The carries conditional with award upon e v i d e n c e work and custody t o do o r r e f r a i n position it." 611 i n the p r e s e n t indicating and So. case t h a t the 4:30-5:00 p.m. 2d at was based 1094. The apparently f a t h e r was when he from the u n c e r t a i n t y such c a r e f o r t h e c h i l d b e t w e e n t h e h o u r s o f 5:00 for i s so c o n d i t i o n a l a w a r d i n S c a n l a n was "military in based unavailable to a.m. when he left r e t u r n e d f r o m work. IV. The m o t h e r c o n t e n d s t h a t the c u s t o d y award t o the c a n n o t be u p h e l d e v e n u n d e r a b e s t - i n t e r e s t s s t a n d a r d . she says, the t r i a l awarding the p a r t i e s to joint custody. basis alternative because the p a r t i e s Ala. discount t o communicate w i t h each Code 1975, First, c o u r t e r r o n e o u s l y r e j e c t e d the o p t i o n of evidentiary unable father and their The joint had custody c o u r t had as a past h i s t o r y o t h e r , see § residences 21 trial were a of an viable being 30-3-152(a)(2), not in close 2110700 g e o g r a p h i c p r o x i m i t y t o each o t h e r , see § 30-3-152(a)(5), Ala. Code 1975. " B e c a u s e t h i s was an i n i t i a l c u s t o d y determination, where t h e p a r t i e s a r e on e q u a l f o o t i n g a n d t h e t r i a l c o u r t must b a s e its decision on what i t determines would be i n the best i n t e r e s t of the c h i l d , our review i s very l i m i t e d . " 845 So. 2d a t 825 ( c i t a t i o n o m i t t e d ) . makes no s p e c i f i c assume t h a t support findings of fact, the t r i a l court i t s judgment, u n l e s s erroneous, Ex p a r t e Headrick, When t h e t r i a l court an a p p e l l a t e c o u r t must made t h e f i n d i n g s n e c e s s a r y s u c h f i n d i n g s w o u l d be Bryowsky, clearly 676 So. 2d 1322, 1324 1996), and t h e a p p e l l a t e c o u r t w i l l reverse the t r i a l to (Ala. court's j u d g m e n t o n l y i f i t i s f o u n d t o be p l a i n l y a n d p a l p a b l y wrong, Ex p a r t e P e r k i n s , 646 So. 2d 46, 47 ( A l a . 1994) . record before B a s e d on t h e u s , we c a n n o t c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e t r i a l j u d g m e n t was p l a i n l y a n d p a l p a b l y wrong. court's "This court i s not a t l i b e r t y t o s e t a s i d e t h e judgment o f t h e t r i a l c o u r t m e r e l y b e c a u s e we m i g h t have d e c i d e d d i f f e r e n t l y h a d we b e e n as t h e t r i a l judge." E t h r i d g e v. E t h r i d g e , 1008 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 7 8 ) . that of the t r i a l court sitting 360 So. 2d 1005, "'To s u b s t i t u t e o u r j u d g m e n t f o r would 22 be t o r e w e i g h the evidence. 2110700 T h i s A l a b a m a l a w does n o t a l l o w . ' " (quoting App. Perkins, 646 So. 2d a t 47 P h i l l i p s v. P h i l l i p s , 622 So. 2d 410, 412 (Ala. Civ. 1993)). The j u d g m e n t o f t h e C o v i n g t o n C i r c u i t Court i s affirmed. AFFIRMED. Thomas, J . , c o n c u r s . Bryan, J . , concurs i n the r e s u l t , Thompson, P . J . , and Moore, J . , j o i n . 23 with writing, which 2110700 BRYAN, J u d g e , My the c o n c u r r i n g i n the result. review of the r e c o r d i n t h i s best interest of the child case would c o n v i n c e s me have been that served i f D.M.P.C.P. h a d b e e n a l l o w e d t o r e t a i n p h y s i c a l c u s t o d y o f t h e child. However, as an a p p e l l a t e - c o u r t j u d g e , my w i t h the t r i a l for ... court's decision r e v e r s a l of the t r i a l disagreement "does n o t c o n s t i t u t e a b a s i s c o u r t which heard the evidence and o b s e r v e d t h e w i t n e s s e s . " G r i m s l e y v. G r i m s l e y , 545 So. 75, 77 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1989). 2d B e c a u s e I am c o n s t r a i n e d by t h e a p p l i c a b l e s t a n d a r d of review, I concur i n the Thompson, P . J . , and Moore, J . , c o n c u r . 24 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.