Ex parte J.D.A.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
REL:09/04/2015 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate Courts, 300 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36104-3741 ((334) 229-0649), of any typographical or other errors, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is printed in Southern Reporter. SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA SPECIAL TERM, 2015 _________________________ 1140915 _________________________ Ex parte J.D.A. PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS (In re: J.D.A. v. T.A.S.L.) (Mobile Circuit Court, CS-11-6397.04 and .05; Court of Civil Appeals, 2140245) SHAW, Justice. WRIT DENIED. NO OPINION. Stuart, Bolin, Main, and Bryan, JJ., concur. Moore, C.J., and Parker, Murdock, and Wise, JJ., dissent. 1140915 MURDOCK, Justice (dissenting). The so-called "McLendon standard"1 serves as a mechanism to help ensure that the trial court, in attempting to determine the best interest of the child in relation to a proposed change of custody, does not overlook whatever disruption might be occasioned by the proposed change to the end that the trial court correctly determines whether the positive good for the child to be brought about by the proposed change more than offsets the particular disruption that would be caused. Of course, the degree of disruption that will occur can vary greatly from one case to another, just as can the positive benefits of proposed changes. Because I believe the trial court in this case incorrectly considered the McLendon standard to be a more uniformly "severe" restriction than it in fact is, I would grant the petition so that this Court could further examine the record and whether the trial court's approach to this case conflicts with the decision of this Court in Ex parte Cleghorn, 993 So. 2d 462, 467-69 (Ala. 2008). See also Ex parte J.M.F., 730 So. 2d 1190, 1194 (Ala. 1998); Smith v. Smith, 865 So. 2d 1207, 1 Ex parte McLendon, 455 So. 2d 863 (Ala. 1984). 2 1140915 1211-13 (Ala. Civ. App. 2003) (Murdock, J., concurring in the result); and M.W.W. v. B.W., 900 So. 2d 1230, 1237-39 (Ala. Civ. App. 2004) (Murdock, J., concurring in the result). Moore, C.J., and Wise, J., concur. 3
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.
