R.J.R. v. C.J.S.

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 5/6/2011 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 OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011 2100136 R.J.R. v. C.J.S. Appeal from Morgan C i r c u i t (DR-10-615) Court THOMPSON, P r e s i d i n g J u d g e . R.J.R. Morgan ("the f a t h e r " ) Circuit Court appeals from ("the c i r c u i t court") m o d i f y t h e judgment o f a Tennessee c o u r t other things, h i sv i s i t a t i o n with a judgment o f D.J.R. the purporting to relating t o , among ("the c h i l d " ) a n d 2100136 c h i l d support. For the reasons s e t f o r t h h e r e i n , the appeal with i n s t r u c t i o n s to the c i r c u i t its j u d g m e n t and d i s m i s s On January 25, the 2010, entered by the C.J.S. ("the T e n n e s s e e petition Tennessee a Court County, c o u r t " ) on May certified ("the ("the T e n n e s s e e Davidson copy judgment i n c l u d e d court dismiss to vacate action. p e t i t i o n i n t h e Morgan J u v e n i l e t o m o d i f y a judgment we the filed ("the j u v e n i l e a court") judgment") t h a t had been Tennessee, 7, 2008. of mother") She Tennessee Juvenile Court attached to her judgment. The the f o l l o w i n g f a c t u a l background: "[The father] i s a resident of Ohio. [The m o t h e r ] i s a r e s i d e n t of Alabama. B o t h p a r t i e s are p h y s i c i a n s who were i n m e d i c a l s c h o o l a t t h e t i m e o f t h e i r dating r e l a t i o n s h i p . Both p a r t i e s resided i n O h i o u n t i l t h e i r s e p a r a t i o n i n o r a r o u n d May o f 2005 at which time [ t h e mother] r e l o c a t e d t o N a s h v i l l e , Tennessee. [The c h i l d ] was born i n Nashville, T e n n e s s e e , on June 28, 2005. " I n o r a r o u n d O c t o b e r 2005 [ t h e m o t h e r ] s o u g h t t o move f r o m N a s h v i l l e , T e n n e s s e e , t o H u n t s v i l l e , Alabama w i t h the minor child to continue her residency, at which time [ t h e f a t h e r ] f i l e d h i s P e t i t i o n t o E s t a b l i s h P a t e r n i t y . [The f a t h e r ] a l s o sought t o r e s t r a i n [ t h e m o t h e r ] from moving from Tennessee t o Alabama. [The m o t h e r ] f i l e d a Counter P e t i t i o n f o r C u s t o d y and t o d i s s o l v e t h e T e m p o r a r y R e s t r a i n i n g Order. "On O c t o b e r 20, 2005, t h e p a r t i e s h a d a h e a r i n g at which time the S p e c i a l Referee allowed [ t h e m o t h e r ] t o r e l o c a t e t o Alabama w i t h the minor c h i l d , 2 2100136 d e c l a r e d [ t h e f a t h e r ] t o be t h e f a t h e r [ o f the child], set child support, and established a v i s i t a t i o n schedule f o r [the f a t h e r ] that consisted o f t h e t h i r d week o f e a c h month. "The p e n d i n g P e t i t i o n s were t r i e d b e f o r e [ t h e r e f e r e e ] on December 20, 2006. After a lengthy hearing [the referee] designated [the mother] p r i m a r y r e s i d e n t i a l p a r e n t w i t h s o l e d e c i s i o n making authority. The [ r e f e r e e ] p l a c e d t h e p a r t i e s on a s c h e d u l e of six-week p e r i o d s whereby the c h i l d would r e s i d e w i t h [ t h e m o t h e r ] f o r f o u r weeks and v i s i t w i t h [ t h e f a t h e r ] f o r two weeks o f e a c h s i x - w e e k period. "[The f a t h e r ] a p p e a l e d t h e R e f e r e e ' s d e c i s i o n [to the Tennessee c o u r t ] , seeking, among other t h i n g s , an e q u a l d i v i s i o n o f t h e c h i l d ' s t i m e v i a a t h r e e w e e k / t h r e e week s c h e d u l e . "The p a r t i e s f o l l o w e d the Referee's o r d e r e d s c h e d u l e f r o m December 20, 2006, u n t i l t h e t i m e o f t h e new h e a r i n g i n t h i s c a u s e w h i c h c o n c l u d e d on M a r c h 28, 2008." The T e n n e s s e e j u d g m e n t o r d e r e d , among o t h e r mother c o n t i n u e t o s e r v e as t h e parent"; that the referee remain in visitation force; child's schedule that the things, that "primary residential established mother father health up the sole father child's b e n e f i t ; that v i s i t a t i o n p e r i o d w i t h the c h i l d ; t h a t the mother r e t r i e v e the f a t h e r at the child end 3 of at the the beginning the his from the to p i c k f o r the the of child travel insurance by exercise d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g a u t h o r i t y r e g a r d i n g the c h i l d ; t h a t the maintain the father's visitation 2100136 with t h e c h i l d ; t h a t e a c h p a r t y b e a r h i s o r h e r own cost t r a v e l and t h e c o s t o f t h e c h i l d ' s t r a v e l when t h e c h i l d of was w i t h h i m o r h e r ; and t h a t , b e c a u s e t h e m o t h e r ' s income g r e a t l y e x c e e d e d t h e f a t h e r ' s income a t t h a t t i m e , t h e mother pay t h e f a t h e r m o n t h l y c h i l d s u p p o r t o f $92. The T e n n e s s e e judgment indicated and d i d not that, because the p a r t i e s the c h i l d r e s i d e i n T e n n e s s e e a t t h a t t i m e a n d b e c a u s e A l a b a m a was t h e child's home litigate defer state, the Tennessee court "no desire to any f u t u r e i s s u e s b e t w e e n t h e s e p a r t i e s and [would] to the appropriate Alabama court." I n h e r J a n u a r y 25, 2010, p e t i t i o n seeking had to the j u v e n i l e t o m o d i f y t h e Tennessee judgment, t h e mother court asserted t h a t t h e f a t h e r was now a r e s i d e n t o f M a d i s o n C o u n t y , a l t h o u g h he continued Ohio. to t r a v e l back forth between Alabama and She a l l e g e d t h a t , a l t h o u g h t h e f a t h e r h a d e s t a b l i s h e d a residence paying i n M a d i s o n C o u n t y , he h a d r e q u i r e d h e r t o the cost of t r a v e l father's v i s i t a t i o n with that and the h e a l t h insurance between Alabama the c h i l d . continue and O h i o f o r t h e The m o t h e r a l s o the f a t h e r provided alleged f o r the child h a d a h i g h d e d u c t i b l e and t h a t c o m p a r a b l e h e a l t h i n s u r a n c e f o r the child with a lower deductible 4 could be obtained. She 2100136 sought a judgment r e q u i r i n g t h e f a t h e r t o pay c h i l d m o d i f y i n g t h e p r o v i s i o n i n t h e Tennessee judgment support, pertaining t o h e a l t h i n s u r a n c e f o r t h e c h i l d , and m o d i f y i n g t h e p r o v i s i o n in t h e Tennessee judgment p e r t a i n i n g t o t r a v e l c o s t s father's v i s i t a t i o n with On June mother's 2010, petition Alabama. He Tennessee custody 25, the the father i n which also filed judgment child. a he filed denied an the in counterpetition to modify the s o u g h t , among o t h e r that, an purported holding to enter support, i n the the c h i l d . b e l i e v i n g that i t j u r i s d i c t i o n over the claims at i s s u e i n a trial a mother's c h i l d - s u p p o r t child things, increase a c t i o n , t r a n s f e r r e d the a c t i o n to the c i r c u i t After to the resided On J u l y 27, 2010, t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t , lacked subject-matter answer he or, f a i l i n g amount o f h i s v i s i t a t i o n w i t h 1 that i n w h i c h he of the c h i l d f o r the denied of the a c t i o n , judgment i n which court. the c i r c u i t i t terminated court the o b l i g a t i o n , o r d e r e d t h e f a t h e r t o pay the other relief the mother had A s t h e m o t h e r ' s a t t o r n e y made c l e a r a t t h e t r i a l o f t h i s a c t i o n , t h e m o t h e r d i d n o t s e e k a change w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e c h i l d ' s v i s i t a t i o n w i t h the f a t h e r other than a r e a l l o c a t i o n of the t r a v e l costs a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h a t v i s i t a t i o n . 1 5 2100136 requested, denied the f a t h e r ' s request for custody of the c h i l d , and m o d i f i e d t h e f a t h e r ' s v i s i t a t i o n s c h e d u l e b a s e d his on t e s t i m o n y a t t r i a l t h a t he w o u l d b e g i n r e s i d i n g i n A l a b a m a on O c t o b e r 4, On The father f i l e d a t i m e l y appeal. appeal, the f a t h e r contends f o r the f i r s t time i n h i s reply brief over 2010. the t h a t the action registered circuit because c o u r t was the without Tennessee f o r m o d i f i c a t i o n or jurisdiction judgment enforcement with was an not Alabama c o u r t i n accordance w i t h the Uniform I n t e r s t a t e F a m i l y Support Act, § 30-3A-101 e t s e q . , A l a . Code 1975 Uniform C h i l d C u s t o d y J u r i s d i c t i o n and E n f o r c e m e n t A c t , § 3B-101 e t s e q . , A l a . Code 1975 court normally first time 846 ("the U I F S A " ) , o r t h e So. 2d will not ("the consider UCCJEA"). arguments i n an a p p e l l a n t ' s r e p l y b r i e f , 334, 341 ( A l a . 2002), Although raised 918 So. 2d 908, 912 related ( A l a . 2005). we f i n d the i s s u e of j u r i s d i c t i o n d i s p o s i t i v e of t h i s we will The another not address the f a t h e r ' s other UIFSA g o v e r n s " s u p p o r t state. to a time, Because appeal, contentions. o r d e r s " e n t e r e d by a c o u r t o f § 30-3A-301; L a t t i m o r e v. L a t t i m o r e , 991 6 the Lamar, c o u r t ' s s u b j e c t - m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n can be r a i s e d a t any see Ex p a r t e V.S., this for see B y r d v. arguments 30- So. 2100136 2d 239, order" 241 as ( A l a . C i v . App. "a 2008). judgment, decree, or I t defines order, a whether "support temporary, f i n a l , or s u b j e c t to m o d i f i c a t i o n , f o r the b e n e f i t of a c h i l d , a spouse, support, or a former health care, spouse, arrearages, i n c l u d e r e l a t e d c o s t s and attorney's fees, UIFSA p r o v i d e s this and which or for monetary reimbursement, and other relief." § 30-3A-101(22). The a court s t a t e can m o d i f y a c h i l d - s u p p o r t o r d e r i s s u e d by a Plainly, which the two sought health insurance See 30-3A-101(22); § f o r the Tennessee court a of the Tennessee judgment of modification, child child, Lattimore, are 991 conclude t h a t , under the f a c t s of t h i s the of § 30-3A-609. of the aspects mother may f e e s , i n t e r e s t , income w i t h h o l d i n g , t h a t , under c e r t a i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s , of another s t a t e . of provides judgment of which support g o v e r n e d by So. case, the 2d the at UIFSA. 241. the t h i r d mother and We aspect sought a m o d i f i c a t i o n , t r a v e l expenses f o r v i s i t a t i o n , i s a l s o governed by t h e UIFSA. joint T h i s c o u r t has h e l d t h a t " ' " [ v ] i s i t a t i o n i s t h e r i g h t of both the n o n c u s t o d i a l parent and the child"'" and t h a t " ' " [ t ] h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s o f t h e c h i l d a r e f u r t h e r e d by the child being nurtured and guided 7 by both of his or her 2100136 natural parents."'" (Ala. 488, v. M.R.J. v . D.R.B., 34 So. 3d 1287, C i v . App. 2009) ( q u o t i n g J a c k s o n v . J a c k s o n , 999 So. 2 d 494 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2 0 0 7 ) , q u o t i n g D a v i d D.D., 191 M i s c . (N.Y. Sup. C t . 2 0 0 2 ) ) . 2 d 301, i n turn Johnita 3 0 3 , 740 N.Y.S.2d 811, See a l s o § 30-3-160 i n this 1292 general philosophy state parents, even a f t e r a d i v o r c e " ) . that (recognizing children need B e c a u s e we r e c o g n i z e M.D. 813 "the both that a c h i l d has a r i g h t t o v i s i t a t i o n w i t h a n o n c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t and t h a t a c h i l d ' s best i n t e r e s t i s f u r t h e r e d by such visitation, we conclude visitation that with the cost a noncustodial support f o r the c h i l d . 665, 667 (Fla. Dist. 899 share visitation matter); C t . App. any o t h e r . " ) ; i n the cost 1998) ("The for visitation expense of is a childrearing Rapp v . R u s s e l l , 965 S.W.2d 897, request of transporting as a c h i l d - s u p p o r t Viggiano child for c o n s t i t u t e s a form o f (Mo. C t . App. 1998) ( t r e a t i n g f a t h e r ' s mother 1990) parent a See D r a k u l i c h v . D r a k u l i c h , 705 So. 2 d t r a n s p o r t i n g the minor c h i l d expense l i k e of transporting matter v. R i p p e t e a u , rather t h a t t h e expenses o f v i s i t a t i o n 8 the c h i l d f o r than (No. C8-90-1141, n.4 (Minn. C t . App. 1990) ( u n p u b l i s h e d t o have opinion) a custody Dec. 24, (stating a r e "a f o r m o f s u p p o r t " f o r a 2100136 child). contained Thus, we i n the conclude that, like the other to modify the mother's p e t i t i o n requests Tennessee judgment, the mother's r e q u e s t t o modify her o b l i g a t i o n t o pay a p o r t i o n of the v i s i t a t i o n c o s t s under the Tennessee judgment is g o v e r n e d by support order. the UIFSA as seeking the modification of a 2 The other potential basis for the exercise of j u r i s d i c t i o n to modify a f o r e i g n judgment i n v o l v i n g domestic m a t t e r s i s t h e UCCJEA, w h i c h a p p l i e s t o " c h i l d custody determinations." § 30-3B-203 ( p e r m i t t i n g a c o u r t o f t h i s state to modify a " c h i l d custody determination" of another s t a t e under c e r t a i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s ) . However, t h e UCCJEA does not apply t o the mother's r e q u e s t t o modify the requirement i n the Tennessee judgment t h a t she pay a portion of the transportation expenses for v i s i t a t i o n with the father because, although the UCCJEA d e f i n e s a "child custody d e t e r m i n a t i o n " as a j u d g m e n t " p r o v i d i n g f o r t h e l e g a l c u s t o d y , p h y s i c a l custody, or v i s i t a t i o n w i t h respect to a c h i l d , " i t s p e c i f i c a l l y e x c l u d e s f r o m t h a t d e f i n i t i o n any " o r d e r r e l a t i n g to child support or other monetary o b l i g a t i o n of an individual." § 30-3B-102(3) ( e m p h a s i s a d d e d ) . See I n r e S.A.V., 837 S.W.2d 80, 83-84 (Tex. 1992) ( h o l d i n g t h a t an a d j u d i c a t i o n r e g a r d i n g v i s i t a t i o n e x p e n s e s does n o t c o n s t i t u t e a "custody determination" as t h a t t e r m was d e f i n e d by the f o r m e r U n i f o r m C h i l d C u s t o d y J u r i s d i c t i o n A c t ("the U C C J A " ) , which c o n t a i n e d a d e f i n i t i o n of "custody d e t e r m i n a t i o n " that was materially similar to the d e f i n i t i o n p r o v i d e d i n the UCCJEA). B u t see M c C a f f e r y v. G r e e n , 931 P.2d 407, 409 n.4 ( A l a s k a 1997) ( c o n c l u d i n g t h a t an i s s u e r e g a r d i n g v i s i t a t i o n e x p e n s e s was g o v e r n e d by t h e UCCJA d e s p i t e the UCCJA's e x c l u s i o n of d e c i s i o n s " r e l a t i n g to c h i l d support or other m o n e t a r y o b l i g a t i o n o f any p e r s o n " f r o m t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f a "custody determination"). 2 9 2100136 The UIFSA child-support provides order that i s s u e d by another that order i n this This court has h e l d state." that subject-matter jurisdiction f o r e i g n support order t h e UIFSA. App. 12, 2007). 2010] that seeking state "shall § 30-3A-609 a trial over does petition a register (emphasis court a t o modify not added). obtain t o modify a i f i t i s not r e g i s t e r e d p r o p e r l y under See S.A.T. v. E.D., 972 So. 2d 804, 807 ( A l a . C i v . See a l s o M a t t e s v . M a t t e s , So. 3d "the a party trial , court [Ms. 2081122, M a r c h ( A l a . C i v . App. 2010) ( h o l d i n g never obtained subject-matter j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r t h e f o r e i g n c h i l d - s u p p o r t o r d e r " when i t was n o t p r o p e r l y r e g i s t e r e d as r e q u i r e d b y t h e U I F S A ) . The UIFSA p r o v i d e s t h e f o l l o w i n g method f o r r e g i s t e r i n g a c h i l d - s u p p o r t order i n a court of t h i s s t a t e : "(a) A s u p p o r t o r d e r o r i n c o m e - w i t h h o l d i n g order o f a n o t h e r s t a t e may be r e g i s t e r e d i n t h i s s t a t e b y s e n d i n g t h e f o l l o w i n g documents a n d i n f o r m a t i o n t o the a p p r o p r i a t e c o u r t i n t h i s s t a t e : "(1) a l e t t e r of t r a n s m i t t a l to the court requesting registration and enforcement; "(2) two copies, of certified copy, of a l a l r e g i s t e r e d , i n c l u d i n g any an o r d e r ; 10 including one l oorrddeerrss t o be l m o d i f i c a t i o n of 2100136 "(3) a sworn s t a t e m e n t b y t h e p a r t y seeking registration or a certified statement by t h e t r i b u n a l o r c o l l e c t i o n a g e n c y s h o w i n g t h e amount o f a n y a r r e a r a g e ; "(4) known: and t h e name o f t h e o b l i g o r a n d , i f "(I) the o b l i g o r ' s address s o c i a l s e c u r i t y number; " ( i i ) t h e name a n d a d d r e s s of t h e o b l i g o r ' s employer and any other s o u r c e o f income o f t h e o b l i g o r ; and " ( i i i ) a d e s c r i p t i o n and t h e location of property of the o b l i g o r i n t h i s s t a t e n o t exempt from e x e c u t i o n ; and "(5) t h e name a n d a d d r e s s o f t h e o b l i g e e and, i f a p p l i c a b l e , t h e agency o r p e r s o n t o whom s u p p o r t payments a r e t o be remitted. "(b) On r e c e i p t o f a r e q u e s t f o r r e g i s t r a t i o n , t h e r e g i s t e r i n g c o u r t s h a l l c a u s e t h e o r d e r t o be f i l e d as a f o r e i g n j u d g m e n t , t o g e t h e r w i t h one c o p y o f t h e documents a n d i n f o r m a t i o n , r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e i r form." § 30-3A-602. Section 30-3A-605 o f t h e UIFSA p r o v i d e s f o r certain notice to the nonregistering party: "(a) When a s u p p o r t o r d e r o r i n c o m e - w i t h h o l d i n g order issued i n another s t a t e i s r e g i s t e r e d , the r e g i s t e r i n g court s h a l l n o t i f y the nonregistering p a r t y as p r o v i d e d u n d e r t h e A l a b a m a R u l e s o f C i v i l P r o c e d u r e . The n o t i c e must be a c c o m p a n i e d b y a c o p y 11 2100136 of the r e g i s t e r e d order and the documents r e l e v a n t i n f o r m a t i o n accompanying the order. "(b) party: The n o t i c e must i n f o r m the and nonregistering "(1) that a registered order is e n f o r c e a b l e as o f t h e d a t e o f r e g i s t r a t i o n i n t h e same manner as an o r d e r i s s u e d by a court of t h i s s t a t e ; "(2) t h a t a h e a r i n g t o c o n t e s t the v a l i d i t y or enforcement of the r e g i s t e r e d o r d e r must be r e q u e s t e d w i t h i n 30 d a y s a f t e r the date of s e r v i c e o b t a i n e d under the Alabama R u l e s of C i v i l P r o c e d u r e ; "(3) that failure to contest the v a l i d i t y or enforcement of the r e g i s t e r e d o r d e r i n a t i m e l y manner w i l l r e s u l t i n c o n f i r m a t i o n o f t h e o r d e r and e n f o r c e m e n t o f t h e o r d e r and t h e a l l e g e d a r r e a r a g e s and precludes f u r t h e r c o n t e s t of t h a t order w i t h r e s p e c t t o any m a t t e r t h a t c o u l d have been a s s e r t e d ; and "(4) of arrearages." In the registered attached certified present as to the case, required her motion copy of that amount the any alleged Tennessee judgment by the to modify of UIFSA. the judgment, the Although Tennessee the was not mother judgment mother d i d not request t h a t t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t r e g i s t e r t h a t j u d g m e n t as r e q u i r e d § 30-3A-602(a)(1). M o r e o v e r , t h e r e c o r d does n o t r e f l e c t 12 a by that 2100136 either the j u v e n i l e Tennessee judgment court or the c i r c u i t " t o be f i l e d court as a f o r e i g n caused the j u d g m e n t , " as r e q u i r e d by § 30-3A-602(b), o r t h a t t h e n o t i c e r e q u i r e d by § 30-3A-605 was p r o v i d e d Because registered the to the father. Tennessee pursuant judgment t o t h e UIFSA, was not the j u v e n i l e court, subsequently, the c i r c u i t court, never obtained jurisdiction properly over the mother's p e t i t i o n and, subject-matter seeking modification o f t h a t j u d g m e n t , S.A.T., 972 So. 2d a t 807, a n d , as a r e s u l t , the mother's action against See Ex p a r t e Owens, [Ms. 2090899, Dec. 17, 2010] , properly UIFSA.). invoke was v o i d ab ( A l a . C i v . App. 2010) ( M o t h e r ' s r u l e n i s i did not invoke j u r i s d i c t i o n to the father of t r i a l register foreign Moreover, the jurisdiction, jurisdiction same a c t i o n . because juvenile those courts order the mother's and petition pursuant to the petition d i d not circuit court's n o t have the likewise could obtained over the f a t h e r ' s c o u n t e r p e t i t i o n , f i l e d Ex p a r t e Owens, So. 3d c o u r t because she f a i l e d support court's initio. So. 3d a t i n the (Mother's r u l e n i s i p e t i t i o n was a n u l l i t y b e c a u s e o f h e r f a i l u r e t o p r o p e r l y register foreign support order 13 pursuant t o t h e UIFSA, a n d , 2100136 t h e r e f o r e , h e r s u b s e q u e n t a t t e m p t t o c o m p l y w i t h t h e UIFSA was l i k e w i s e a n u l l i t y . ) ; B l e v i n s v. H i l l w o o d O f f i c e C t r . Owners' Ass'n, 51 So. 3d lacked standing, subject-matter dismissed 317, 321-23 complaint ( A l a . 2010) failed jurisdiction, to and action the c i r c u i t c o u r t ' s s u b j e c t - m a t t e r was dismissed. a support Civ. nullity "A subject-matter was 2008). her due jurisdiction, action by Vann v. Cook, 989 we to to modify should a So. dismiss have court c i r c u i t court to vacate 2d 556, the will 559 14 result, i t s judgment without writing. not (Ala. appeal Moore, J J . , c o n c u r . Bryan, J . , concurs i n the been lacking APPEAL DISMISSED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. Thomas, and or the mother's the mother's a c t i o n . Pittman, be counterclaims.). i s a b s o l u t e l y v o i d and Accordingly, court's the j u v e n i l e c o u r t ' s entered jurisdiction i n s t r u c t i o n s to the dismiss and judgment an a p p e a l . " App. trial conclude t h a t the mother's p e t i t i o n the Tennessee judgment d i d not i n v o k e petition invoke i n t o t o , i n c l u d i n g defendant's B e c a u s e we (Because p l a i n t i f f with and

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.