C.M. v. Madison County Department of Human Resources

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 02/08/2013 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 ( ( 3 3 4 ) 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 2111147 C.M. v. Madison County Department o f Human Resources Appeal from Madison J u v e n i l e Court (JU-09-1840.02, JU-09-1841.02, JU-09-1842.02, and JU-09-1843.02) PITTMAN, Judge. C.M. ("the m o t h e r " ) a p p e a l s f r o m j u d g m e n t s o f t h e M a d i s o n Juvenile children: Court terminating R.L., whose date her parental of b i r t h r i g h t s t o her four i s May 9, 1999; R.M., whose d a t e o f b i r t h i s May 2 6 , 2 0 0 4 ; T.M., whose d a t e o f b i r t h 2111147 i s December 15, 2005; a n d A.M., whose d a t e o f b i r t h i s J a n u a r y 20, 2009. On a p p e a l , t h e mother argues terminating her parental rights t h a t t h e judgments are v o i d because, the j u v e n i l e c o u r t l a c k e d p e r s o n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n On O c t o b e r 20, 2 0 1 1 , t h e M a d i s o n Human R e s o u r c e s parental rights. on February over h e r . Department o f ("DHR") p e t i t i o n e d t o t e r m i n a t e t h e m o t h e r ' s 1 The j u v e n i l e c o u r t s e t t h e m a t t e r 2 1 , 2012. for trial On F e b r u a r y 17, 2012, t h e m o t h e r ' s c o u n s e l moved t o c o n t i n u e appointed parents County she s a y s , t h e h e a r i n g because t h e had n o t been s e r v e d . The j u v e n i l e court reset the t r i a l d a t e , a n d DHR moved t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t t o a l l o w s e r v i c e of process by p u b l i c a t i o n . DHR a t t a c h e d t o i t s motion the a f f i d a v i t o f DHR c a s e w o r k e r Wanda S a v a g e , who a v e r r e d t h a t t h e mother "avoids residence petition service f o r more t h a n and h e r p r e s e n t with reasonable and/or has been absent from t h i r t y days s i n c e t h e f i l i n g location i s unknown d i l i g e n c e be a s c e r t a i n e d . " her of the ... a n d c a n n o t On M a r c h 9, 2012, DHR a l s o p e t i t i o n e d t o t e r m i n a t e t h e p a r e n t a l r i g h t s o f A.B., t h e f a t h e r o f t h e o l d e s t c h i l d , R.L., a n d o f S.M., t h e f a t h e r o f t h e o t h e r t h r e e c h i l d r e n R.M., T.M., a n d A.M. N e i t h e r man p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e t e r m i n a t i o n p r o c e e d i n g s , a n d n e i t h e r has appealed 1 2 2111147 the juvenile court entered an order approving service by publication. On entered March 21, a notice 2012, the mother's o f appearance appointed as c o u n s e l attorney f o r t h e mother, r e q u e s t i n g t h a t he be s e r v e d w i t h a l l n o t i c e s a n d p l e a d i n g s i n the case. One week later, the mother's counsel filed " n o t i c e o f n o n - w a i v e r o f s e r v i c e , " s t a t i n g as f o l l o w s : " 1 . C o u n s e l was i n f o r m e d t h a t t h e M a d i s o n C o u n t y D e p a r t m e n t o f Human R e s o u r c e s h a s f i l e d a P e t i t i o n for Termination o f P a r e n t a l R i g h t s i n t h e above s t y l e d matter. "2. A t t o r n e y f i l e d a n o t i c e o f a p p e a r a n c e i n o r d e r to ensure t h a t a l l f u t u r e p l e a d i n g s and o r d e r s o f t h e c o u r t be p r o p e r l y f o r w a r d e d t o t h e a t t o r n e y . "3. The n o t i c e o f a p p e a r a n c e f i l e d b y t h e a t t o r n e y was n o t i n t e n d e d as a w a i v e r o f s e r v i c e o f t h e p e t i t i o n on t h e m o t h e r , [C.M.]. "4. A c c o r d i n g l y , a t t o r n e y i n f o r m s t h e c o u r t t h a t t h e m o t h e r does n o t w a i v e s e r v i c e o f p r o c e s s i n t h i s c a u s e . Upon b e i n g s e r v e d , t h e m o t h e r w i l l f i l e an a p p r o p r i a t e answer. "Wherefore, the premises c o n s i d e r e d , a t t o r n e y prays that t h i s Honorable court w i l l take n o t i c e t h a t the m o t h e r does n o t w a i v e s e r v i c e o f p r o c e s s i n t h e a b o v e - s t y l e d case. In the event t h a t t h i s N o t i c e o f Non-Waiver o f S e r v i c e i s n o t s u f f i c i e n t t o p r e s e r v e the mother's r i g h t s r e l a t i n g t o s e r v i c e , a t t o r n e y r e s p e c t f u l l y r e q u e s t s t h e c o u r t t o a d v i s e so t h a t a p p r o p r i a t e f i l i n g s t o p r o t e c t the mother's r i g h t s can be f a c i l i t a t e d . A t t o r n e y f u r t h e r p r a y s f o r any other such a l t e r n a t i v e form of r e l i e f deemed 3 a 2111147 n e c e s s a r y and and e q u i t a b l e Notice of the published on counsel for to e f f e c t u a t e cause." termination-of-parental-rights i n The beginning proper i n order outcome i n t h i s a fair petition H u n t s v i l l e Times f o r f o u r c o n s e c u t i v e May 4, 2012. On June 20, 2012, the f i l e d an o b j e c t i o n t o DHR's F e b r u a r y 27, was weeks mother's 2012, motion s e r v i c e by p u b l i c a t i o n . The termination a c t i o n was t r i e d on June 25, 2012. The mother p e r s o n a l l y appeared, a l o n g w i t h her a p p o i n t e d counsel. In whether response there were to the any juvenile preliminary court's i n q u i r y as matters to be to addressed, the m o t h e r ' s a t t o r n e y moved t o s t r i k e t h e c o u r t r e p o r t s t h a t w o u l d be o f f e r e d by DHR, earlier motion moved t o s t r i k e t h e f a c t u a l a v e r m e n t s i n an filed by judge to recuse h e r s e l f . to the affidavit publication, o u t any and in and moved the support of the the motion affidavit p r o p e r method as set j u v e n i l e court mother out in did "not [Rule] waive 4.3[, for had f a c t s i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e m o t h e r was the juvenile-court C o u n s e l then renewed h i s asserting that s t a t i n g that The DHR, objection service failed avoiding to set service service A l a . R. by by Civ. d e n i e d a l l t h e m o t h e r ' s m o t i o n s and, the P.]." with r e s p e c t t o t h e l a s t m o t i o n , s t a t e d t h a t any d e f e c t s i n s e r v i c e 4 2111147 were c u r e d b y t h e m o t h e r ' s p r e s e n c e at t r i a l . The m o t h e r d i d not t e s t i f y o r p r e s e n t any w i t n e s s e s o r o t h e r e v i d e n c e . mother's c o u n s e l cross-examined "directed verdict" DHR's w i t n e s s a n d moved f o r a at the close j u v e n i l e c o u r t denied t h a t motion the t r i a l , announced i t s r u l i n g The of the evidence. and, a t t h e 2 The conclusion of from t h e bench: "The c o u r t h a v i n g f o u n d t h e f o u r c h i l d r e n t h a t a r e t h e s u b j e c t o f t h i s p r o c e e d i n g t o be d e p e n d e n t c h i l d r e n , the court hereby grants custody t o the A l a b a m a D e p a r t m e n t o f Human R e s o u r c e s a n d t h e S t a t e of A l a b a m a f o r p u r p o s e o f a d o p t i v e p l a c e m e n t . " The juvenile court memorialized i t s ruling i n judgments e n t e r e d i n f a v o r o f DHR on A u g u s t 9, 2012, i n e a c h c a s e . The m o t h e r f i l e d a t i m e l y n o t i c e o f a p p e a l t o t h i s c o u r t on A u g u s t 22, 2012. The j u v e n i l e c o u r t c e r t i f i e d t h e r e c o r d a s a d e q u a t e pursuant t o R u l e 2 8 ( A ) , A l a . R. J u v . P. Section 4.3, § 12-15-318, A l a . Code A l a . R. C i v . P., g o v e r n s publication L.K. the procedure Dep't o f Human Res., C i v . App. 2 0 1 0 ) . Rule f o r s e r v i c e by i n a termination-of-parental-rights v. L e e C n t y . (Ala. 1975, r a t h e r t h a n case. See 64 So. 3d 1112, 1114 S e c t i o n 12-15-318 p r o v i d e s : B e c a u s e t h i s a c t i o n was t r i e d b e f o r e t h e c o u r t w i t h o u t a j u r y , t h e m o t i o n i s p r o p e r l y c o n s i d e r e d one f o r a j u d g m e n t on p a r t i a l f i n d i n g s , p u r s u a n t t o R u l e 5 2 ( c ) , A l a . R. C i v . P., and R u l e 1 ( a ) , A l a . R. J u v . P. 2 5 2111147 " ( a ) E x c e p t as o t h e r w i s e p r o v i d e d b y t h e A l a b a m a Rules of Juvenile Procedure and t h i s section, service of process of termination of parental r i g h t s a c t i o n s s h a l l be made i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e A l a b a m a Rules of C i v i l Procedure. "(b) I f service of process h a s n o t been completed within 90 d a y s o f t h e f i l i n g of the termination of parental rights petition, the p e t i t i o n e r s h a l l request s e r v i c e by p u b l i c a t i o n . " ( c ) S e r v i c e o f p r o c e s s b y p u b l i c a t i o n may n o t be ordered by t h e j u v e n i l e court unless the f o l l o w i n g c o n d i t i o n s a r e met: "(1) The c h i l d who i s t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e p r o c e e d i n g s was a b a n d o n e d i n t h e s t a t e . "(2) The s t a t e o r p r i v a t e d e p a r t m e n t or agency h a v i n g c u s t o d y o f t h e c h i l d has e s t a b l i s h e d , by e v i d e n c e p r e s e n t e d t o t h e j u v e n i l e court, that the absent parent or parents are avoiding service of process or t h e i r w h e r e a b o u t s a r e unknown a n d c a n n o t be ascertained with reasonable d i l i g e n c e . "(d) S e r v i c e s h a l l be made b y p u b l i c a t i o n i n a newspaper o f g e n e r a l c i r c u l a t i o n i n t h e county o f the j u v e n i l e c o u r t h a v i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n and i n t h e c o u n t y o f t h e l a s t known a d d r e s s o f t h e p a r e n t o r p a r e n t s o f t h e a b a n d o n e d c h i l d , a t l e a s t once a week f o r f o u r c o n s e c u t i v e weeks." Savage's a f f i d a v i t d i d n o t a l l e g e abandoned i n t h e s t a t e . the j u v e n i l e court, was p r e s e n t e d w i t h that t h e c h i l d r e n h a d been N o r does t h e r e c o r d demonstrate that b e f o r e i t o r d e r e d s e r v i c e by p u b l i c a t i o n , any e v i d e n c e had been a b a n d o n e d , t h a t i n d i c a t i n g that t h e m o t h e r was a v o i d i n g 6 the children service, or 2111147 that DHR had used reasonable diligence to ascertain the mother's whereabouts. " S e c t i o n 12-15-318(c) c l e a r l y p r o v i d e s t h a t two c o n d i t i o n s must be s a t i s f i e d i n o r d e r f o r a j u v e n i l e court to grant a motion to serve a parent by publication in a termination-of-parental-rights case. F i r s t , t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t must f i n d t h a t t h e c h i l d has b e e n a b a n d o n e d i n t h i s s t a t e . Second, the juvenile court must find, based on evidence p r e s e n t e d t o i t by DHR o r by any o t h e r p e r s o n h a v i n g l e g a l c u s t o d y o f the abandoned c h i l d , 'that the absent parent or parents are a v o i d i n g s e r v i c e of p r o c e s s o r t h e i r w h e r e a b o u t s a r e unknown and c a n n o t be ascertained with reasonable diligence.' § 1 2 - 1 5 - 3 1 8 ( c ) ( 2 ) . I f t h o s e c o n d i t i o n s a r e met, the j u v e n i l e c o u r t can t h e n o r d e r s e r v i c e by p u b l i c a t i o n as s e t o u t i n § 1 2 - 1 5 - 3 1 8 ( d ) . " L.K., 64 So. 3d a t 1114-15. On M a r c h 21, 2012, a n o t i c e of appearance. 320 (Ala. Civ. App. the mother's a p p o i n t e d c o u n s e l filed I n Simmons v. Simmons, 99 So. 3d 2011), this court held that 316, "[an a t t o r n e y ' s ] f i l i n g a n o t i c e o f a p p e a r a n c e on b e h a l f o f [ h i s o r her client] [the client]." attempted waiver constitute[s] On March a waiver 28, of s e r v i c e 2012, the of process mother's counsel t o "amend" t h e n o t i c e o f a p p e a r a n c e t o d i s a v o w of s e r v i c e of process, but by any a n o t i c e of appearance i s n o t a " p l e a d i n g , " see R u l e 7 ( a ) , A l a . R. C i v . P., to which the e x c e p t i o n to waiver of the defense of i n s u f f i c i e n c y of s e r v i c e 7 2111147 of process outlined i n Rule 1 2 ( h ) ( 1 ) , A l a . R. C i v . P., "amended p l e a d i n g s " i s a p p l i c a b l e . C n t y . Dep't o f Human Res., So. 3d , for C f . D.M.T.J.W.D. v . L e e [Ms. 2110795, O c t o b e r 26, 2012] ( A l a . C i v . App. 2012) ( h o l d i n g that mother " d i d n o t waive t h e defense o f l a c k o f p e r s o n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n by failing her to raise a n s w e r t o DHR's rights" to i ti n her f i r s t because responsive pleading, i . e . , ... p e t i t i o n to terminate her parental " t h e mother sought l e a v e t o amend h e r answer i n c l u d e t h e defense o f l a c k o f p e r s o n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n , ... DHR d i d n o t o b j e c t t o t h a t m o t i o n , a n d ... t h e j u v e n i l e c o u r t a l l o w e d t h e m o t h e r t o amend h e r a n s w e r " ) . Finally, appearance service, even assuming that t h e mother w a i v e d when t h e defense she appeared termination-of-parental-rights participated i n the t r i a l over with trial of lack of of personal her counsel on June proceedings at the 25, 2012, by moving and to strike e v i d e n c e , b y c r o s s - e x a m i n i n g DHR's w i t n e s s , a n d b y m o v i n g f o r a j u d g m e n t on p a r t i a l "'[I]f notice c o u l d be amended t o d i s a v o w t h e p r e v i o u s w a i v e r o f jurisdiction certain counsel's a defendant h i sperson, findings. intends to rely he must appear, 8 See s u p r a n o t e 2. on want o f j u r i s d i c t i o n i f at a l l , f o rthe sole 2111147 purpose objecting to appearance for any other general.'" R.M. v. E l m o r e C n t y . Dep't o f Human R e s . , 3d of 1195, Summers, 274 (emphasis The 1200 the jurisdiction purpose ( A l a . C i v . App. A l a . 673, 681, 151 is 2011) of the usually 2d 210, An considered 75 So. Persons (quoting So. court. v. 215 (1963)) added). juvenile jurisdiction court o v e r C.M. properly I t s judgments exercised personal are a f f i r m e d . AFFIRMED. Thomas and D o n a l d s o n , J J . , c o n c u r . Thompson, without P.J., and Moore, writings. 9 J . , concur i n 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.