184 So. 3d 1036
Ala. Civ. App.2015Background
- Parties divorced in Alabama (2008); mother awarded sole physical custody; father's visitation later modified (2012).
- Alabama court ordered father to pay $950/month child support (2013).
- Mother filed a petition to modify visitation in Georgia (Dec. 17, 2014).
- Father filed in Alabama for contempt (visitation enforcement) and child-support modification (Jan. 2, 2015).
- Mother moved to dismiss in Alabama, arguing Alabama lacked continuing, exclusive jurisdiction under the UCCJEA; Alabama court held a telephonic conference with the Georgia judge, held an evidentiary hearing, and denied the motion (Mar. 18, 2015).
- Mother petitioned this court for a writ of mandamus to compel dismissal of the father’s Alabama contempt/visitation enforcement action (Apr. 27, 2015).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mother) | Defendant's Argument (Father) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Alabama retained continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over child-custody/visitation enforcement under UCCJEA §30-3B-202(a)(1) | Alabama lost jurisdiction because child and mother now live in Georgia and lack significant connections to Alabama | Alabama retains jurisdiction because father remains an Alabama resident | Held: Alabama lacked continuing, exclusive jurisdiction to enforce visitation (dismissal required) |
| Whether UCCJEA analysis applies to child-support modification claim | (Implicit) UCCJEA governs custody/visitation only; mother sought dismissal of custody portion | Father’s petition included both custody enforcement and child-support modification | Held: UCCJEA does not apply to child-support/monetary obligations; motion only addressed visitation enforcement portion |
| Whether substantial evidence regarding the child’s welfare exists in Alabama | Mother argued substantial evidence is in Georgia (school, medical, social ties) | Father argued his Alabama residence preserved sufficient connection/evidence | Held: Substantial evidence concerning the child’s care, protection, training, and relationships is located in Georgia, not Alabama |
| Appropriate remedy when trial court lacks UCCJEA jurisdiction | Mother sought dismissal and mandamus directing dismissal | Father proceeded in Alabama trial court; opposed dismissal | Held: Mandamus granted directing Alabama court to dismiss the father’s contempt/visitation enforcement petition |
Key Cases Cited
- Lattimore v. Lattimore, 991 So.2d 239 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008) (child-support orders are not "child custody determinations" under the UCCJEA)
- C.J.L. v. M.W.B., 868 So.2d 451 (Ala. Civ. App. 2003) (visitation/enforcement treated as child-custody determinations)
- Patrick v. Williams, 952 So.2d 1131 (Ala. Civ. App. 2006) (parental residency alone does not satisfy UCCJEA "significant connection")
- White v. Harrison-White, 760 N.W.2d 691 (Mich. Ct. App. 2008) (interpreting "significant connection" and holding meaningful in-state parenting time matters)
- In re Isquierdo, 426 S.W.3d 128 (Tex. App. 2012) (trial court erred where evidence of children’s welfare was located in another state)
- In re Forlenza, 140 S.W.3d 373 (Tex. 2004) (both lack of significant connection and lack of substantial in-state evidence required to end continuing jurisdiction)
- Billhime v. Billhime, 952 A.2d 1174 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2008) (children’s medical, school, social ties in another state weigh against continuing jurisdiction)
- Ex parte Siderius, 144 So.3d 319 (Ala. 2013) (mandamus may direct dismissal when UCCJEA jurisdiction is lacking)
- Ex parte McNaughton, 728 So.2d 592 (Ala. 1998) (standards for issuance of writ of mandamus)