C.C.N. v. R.E.S., 239 So. 3d 1164

Parents (father C.C.N. and mother R.E.S.) share a child born 2009; juvenile court originally adjudicated paternity and awarded joint legal custody but mother sole physical custody; father had visitation.
Father repeatedly sought custody modifications (filed Dec. 2013); litigation spanned juvenile court and a de novo appeal to circuit court, with multiple temporary orders and allegations of sexual abuse and parental alienation by both parents.
In Sept. 2014 Judge Naman recused and purported to transfer the father's petition to the juvenile court; clerk re-docketed the matter in the juvenile court as a modification proceeding.
After multi-day hearings in juvenile court, the juvenile court denied the father’s petition to modify custody (Mar. 22, 2016), finding no material change in circumstances and that neither parent cooperated in the child’s best interests; reinstated child support.
Father appealed, raising: (1) that a recused judge may not appoint his successor and thus the juvenile judge lacked jurisdiction; (2) juvenile court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over this custody modification; and (3) the merits — that the denial was plainly and palpably wrong.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a recused judge may designate the successor judge	Judge Naman’s assignment of Judge Brown was invalid; a disqualified judge can’t appoint successor (Jim Walter Homes)	Mother: procedural defect not preserved; assignment did not deprive jurisdiction	Issue waived for appellate review; assignment not reversible here because objection not raised below
Whether juvenile court had subject-matter jurisdiction	Father: custody dispute between parents falls outside juvenile-court dependency jurisdiction	Mother: juvenile court had prior parentage/custody judgment and §12-15-115(a)(7) authorizes modification	Juvenile court had jurisdiction to modify a prior juvenile-court custody/parentage judgment; transfer proper
Preservation of procedural/jurisdictional defects	Father preserved by appellate brief	Mother: father failed to object in trial court, thus waived	Court held father failed to preserve the recusal/assignment objection and cites precedent requiring timely objection
Merits — whether custody modification warranted under McLendon standard	Father: allegations of mother’s abuse/alienation justify awarding him custody	Mother: prior findings and evidence show no beneficial change; both parents contributed to instability	Juvenile court’s factual findings supported by ore tenus evidence; no material change proven and decision not plainly or palpably wrong — modification denied

Ex parte Jim Walter Homes, 776 So.2d 76 (Ala. 2000) (a judge disqualified by ethics rules may not appoint his successor under Rule 13)
L.R.S. v. M.J., 229 So.3d 772 (Ala. Civ. App. 2016) (juvenile court cannot adjudicate custody under dependency jurisdiction absent a finding of dependency)
Ex parte McLendon, 455 So.2d 863 (Ala. 1984) (standard for modifying custody when primary physical custody awarded to other parent)
Ex parte Perkins, 646 So.2d 46 (Ala. 1994) (custody determinations on oral testimony are accorded a presumption of correctness)
Ex parte Fann, 810 So.2d 631 (Ala. 2001) (trial court’s ability to judge witness credibility in custody cases and presumption of correctness)
Ex parte N.B., 204 So.3d 887 (Ala. Civ. App. 2016) (authorizing transfer of a case to the appropriate court within the same county)