R.P.M. v. P.D.A.

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 11/30/2012 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 Reporter o f Decisions, 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 2110915 R.P.M. v. P.D.A. Appeal from Limestone J u v e n i l e Court (CS-11-17) MOORE, J u d g e . R.P.M. ("the m o t h e r " ) a p p e a l s from a judgment e n t e r e d b y the Limestone J u v e n i l e Court ( h e r e i n a f t e r sometimes t o as " t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t " ) . We d i s m i s s t h e a p p e a l . referred 2110915 Background On M a r c h 3 1 , 2 0 1 1 , P.D.A. juvenile court was b o r n on M a r c h ("the f a t h e r " ) t o m o d i f y c u s t o d y o f P.A. 13, 2002. He a s s e r t e d Court of Davidson County, Tennessee Court"), child, previously had p e t i t i o n e d the ("the c h i l d " ) , that who the Juvenile ("the D a v i d s o n J u v e n i l e adjudicated his paternity of the had awarded t h e mother p h y s i c a l c u s t o d y o f t h e c h i l d , and h a d o r d e r e d t h e f a t h e r t o p a y c h i l d asserted that, since the entry of support. that 1 He f u r t h e r judgment by the D a v i d s o n J u v e n i l e C o u r t , t h e m o t h e r a n d t h e c h i l d h a d moved t o A l a b a m a , where t h e y h a d r e s i d e d f o r t h e t h r e e y e a r s the filing material of h i s p e t i t i o n . change The f a t h e r a l s o a s s e r t e d i n circumstances had o c c u r r e d s h o u l d be a w a r d e d c u s t o d y o f t h e c h i l d . was a s s i g n e d preceding such that a that The f a t h e r ' s he petition a "CS" c i v i l - a c t i o n number b y t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t . The m o t h e r f i l e d a c o u n t e r c l a i m seeking t o modify the father's child-support obligation. On M a r c h 7, 2012, t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t tenus hearing. At that evidence, other among hearing, things, conducted the father a certified submitted 2 into c o p y o f a May The f a t h e r d i d n o t a t t a c h t o h i s p e t i t i o n c o p i e s o f t h e j u d g m e n t he r e f e r e n c e d . 1 an o r e 6, certified 2110915 2004, order, entered adjudicating the by the father's Davidson paternity pendente l i t e v i s i t a t i o n schedule also 15, submitted 2004, into order evidence i n which and Davidson Court, establishing f o r the f a t h e r . a certified the Juvenile The c o p y o f an a father October J u v e n i l e Court had i n c o r p o r a t e d the p a r t i e s ' v o l u n t a r y agreement d e s i g n a t i n g the m o t h e r as t h e " p r i m a r y the "alternate r e s i d e n t i a l p a r e n t " and residential parent," awarding t h e f a t h e r as the father s p e c i f i e d v i s i t a t i o n s c h e d u l e , and o r d e r i n g t h e f a t h e r t o child support. specifically On May In that order, Davidson s t a t e d : " A l l other matters 1, 2012, the juvenile f i n d i n g t h a t t h e f a t h e r had met parte the McLendon, 455 So. custody m o d i f i c a t i o n . 3 The 2d are Juvenile reserved." court entered a ( A l a . 1984), to pay Court 2 judgment h i s burden of p r o o f under 863 a warrant Ex a j u v e n i l e c o u r t awarded the f a t h e r p h y s i c a l custody of the c h i l d , awarded the mother a specified T h e o r d e r s s u b m i t t e d by t h e f a t h e r were c e r t i f i e d by t h e c l e r k o f t h e D a v i d s o n J u v e n i l e C o u r t and by a j u d g e o f t h e Davidson J u v e n i l e Court. The r e c o r d does n o t c o n t a i n a c o p y o f a f i n a l j u d g m e n t e n t e r e d by t h e D a v i d s o n J u v e n i l e C o u r t . 2 A l t h o u g h t h e j u d g m e n t b o r e t h e d a t e o f A p r i l 3, 2012, i t was n o t e n t e r e d i n t o t h e S t a t e J u d i c i a l I n f o r m a t i o n S y s t e m u n t i l May 1, 2012. See R u l e 5 8 ( c ) , A l a . R. C i v . P. 3 3 2110915 visitation schedule, support. The requested and 3, 2012, court the mother specifically to pay 2012. On a l l other the mother f i l e d a "Motion t o R e c o n s i d e r " the j u v e n i l e c o u r t ' s judgment; t h a t motion 8, denied child relief. On May juvenile ordered J u n e 12, was d e n i e d on 2012, the mother filed her this court, both the mother May n o t i c e of appeal. At the request father f i l e d the the A l t h o u g h t h e a p p e a l was permission fundamental and r e g a r d i n g the t i m e l i n e s s of "letter briefs" mother's appeal. such of "does question not of preclude allowed to proceed, r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of appellate jurisdiction after the an a p p e l l a t e c o u r t has had an o p p o r t u n i t y t o r e v i e w t h e r e c o r d . " S m i t h v. S m i t h , see 919 So. 2d 315, a l s o Wallace (Ala. C i v . App. notice of v. 1997) Tee Jays 316 n.1 Mfg. (noting this jurisdictional matters ( A l a . C i v . App. Co., 689 So. 2d court's policy a t any time, 2005); 210, 211 of t a k i n g e v e n ex mero motu). Analysis A l t h o u g h t h e m o t h e r ' s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l i n d i c a t e s t h a t she i s a p p e a l i n g f r o m a j u d g m e n t e n t e r e d by t h e L i m e s t o n e 4 Circuit 2110915 C o u r t , we n o t e t h a t t h e f a t h e r ' s p e t i t i o n was p r o p e r l y and d o c k e t e d i n t h e L i m e s t o n e J u v e n i l e C o u r t . 1975, § 1 2 - 1 5 - 1 1 5 ( a ) ( 8 ) . that See A l a . Code T h e r e i s no i n d i c a t i o n i n t h e t h e a c t i o n was t r a n s f e r r e d f r o m t h e L i m e s t o n e Court t o t h e Limestone Circuit as a juvenile-court designated with C o u r t , and t h e judgment c i r c u i t court. 1276, judge. i t is filed App. from in his a case a juvenile- i na j u v e n i l e court or i n a See H.J.T. v . S t a t e e x r e l . M.S.M., 34 So. 3 d 1278-79 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2 0 0 9 ) . " 2110260, June "Moreover, 4 a ' C S ' c a s e number i s c o n s i d e r e d c o u r t a c t i o n , whether record Juvenile w h i c h t h e m o t h e r a p p e a l s was e n t e r e d b y Judge W o o d r u f f capacity filed C.W.S. v . C.M.P., [Ms. 22, 2 0 1 2 ] ___ So. 3d ___ , ___ n.1 ( A l a . Civ. 2012). B a s e d on t h e a b o v e , we c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e A l a b a m a R u l e s o f J u v e n i l e Procedure p r o p e r l y govern t h i s a c t i o n . As a r e s u l t , we must c o n s i d e r w h e t h e r t h e m o t h e r ' s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l i n v o k e d the appellate jurisdiction of this court. " I t i s w e l l s e t t l e d that j u r i s d i c t i o n a l matters are o f s u c h s i g n i f i c a n c e t h a t an a p p e l l a t e c o u r t may t a k e n o t i c e o f them e x mero motu. W a l l a c e v . Tee We f u r t h e r n o t e t h a t t h e c a s e - a c t i o n summary i n c l u d e d i n t h e r e c o r d e x p r e s s l y i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e a c t i o n was m a i n t a i n e d i n t h e Limestone J u v e n i l e Court. 4 5 2110915 J a y s M f g . Co., 689 So. 2d 210, 211 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 9 7 ) ; Nunn v. B a k e r , 518 So. 2d 711, 712 ( A l a . 1 9 8 7 ) . 'The t i m e l y f i l i n g o f [ a ] n o t i c e o f a p p e a l i s jurisdictional act.' Rudd v. Rudd, 467 So. 2d --4, 965 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 8 5 ) ; see a l s o P a r k e r v. P a r k e r , 946 So. 2d 480, 485 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2006) ('an u n t i m e l y f i l e d n o t i c e o f a p p e a l r e s u l t s i n ^ a l a c k of a p p e l l a t e j u r i s d i c t i o n , which cannot be waived')." Kennedy v. Merriman, 963 So. 2d 86, 87-88 (Ala. Civ. App. 2007). Under the Alabama R u l e s of J u v e n i l e P r o c e d u r e , the mother h a d 14 d a y s f r o m t h e d e n i a l o f h e r p o s t j u d g m e n t her n o t i c e H.J.T. v. C i v . App. be of appeal. State ex See motion to R u l e 2 8 ( C ) , A l a . R. r e l . M.S.M., 34 So. 3d file J u v . P.; and 1276, 1279 (Ala. 2009) ("A n o t i c e o f a p p e a l i n a j u v e n i l e a c t i o n must f i l e d w i t h i n 14 d a y s o f t h e d a t e o f e n t r y or the d e n i a l of a of the [ t i m e l y f i l e d ] postjudgment judgment motion."). Thus, t h e m o t h e r ' s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l must have b e e n no l a t e r t h a n May 22, 2012, did not appeal u n t i l had expired, appeal. this t o be t i m e l y . June 12, court has 2012, no be d i s m i s s e d t h e 14-day jurisdiction i f t h e n o t i c e o f a p p e a l was 6 Because the mother after See R u l e 2 ( a ) ( 1 ) , A l a . R. App. filed P. period to consider ("An appeal her shall not t i m e l y f i l e d to 2110915 invoke the therefore, jurisdiction dismiss of the the mother's appellate appeal. court."). We, 5 APPEAL DISMISSED. Thompson, P . J . , and Pittman, Bryan, and Thomas, J J . , concur. We e x p r e s s no o p i n i o n as t o w h e t h e r t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t acquired subject-matter j u r i s d i c t i o n of the issues presented i n the father's custody-modification p e t i t i o n . 5 7

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.