Herzog v. Stonerook, 160 So. 3d 340

Background

Former spouses are both U.S. Army service members; they obtained an uncontested Hawaii divorce on September 14, 2009, later amended January 22, 2010, which set child support at $8,010/month to the former wife (primary custodian).
Husband relocated and sought to register the Hawaii divorce and amended judgments in Coffee County, Alabama, and to modify child support based on changed incomes; he filed a document titled “Registration and Petition for Modification of Divorce Decree.”
Husband’s filings were signed by counsel (unverified) and the record on appeal contained only one copy of each Hawaii judgment; husband’s petition alleged he was not in arrears but did not include a sworn statement as required by UIFSA § 30-3A-602(a)(3).
Wife moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; the trial court denied the motion, found registration proper, and after a hearing modified husband’s support obligation to $1,323.15/month and denied several of wife’s counterclaims.
On appeal, the court considered only whether the trial court had subject-matter jurisdiction under the UIFSA registration requirements; the appeal was dismissed and the trial court’s May 1, 2013 judgment was ordered vacated for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Herzog)	Defendant's Argument (Stonerook)	Held
Whether Alabama court had subject-matter jurisdiction to modify Hawaii child-support orders under UIFSA	Herzog argued registration was inadequate; trial court nonetheless had no jurisdiction to modify foreign orders without strict compliance	Stonerook argued he properly registered the orders (submitted required copies) and substantially complied; his unverified petition stating no arrearage sufficed	Court held strict compliance required; registrant must file a sworn statement of arrearage (or sworn statement of none); unverified assertion was insufficient, so no subject-matter jurisdiction and modification was void
Whether husband’s failure to file two copies/certified copy and a sworn arrearage statement affected jurisdiction	Herzog contended missing documents and lack of sworn statement deprived court of jurisdiction	Stonerook contended any defects were harmless and wife did not plead arrearage (waiver/substantial compliance)	Court rejected substantial-compliance/harmless-error arguments; strict statutory compliance is jurisdictional under UIFSA
Whether healthcare/medical expenses are part of required arrearage disclosure	Herzog argued unpaid medical expenses constitute child-support arrearage and had to be disclosed under oath	Stonerook claimed he was unaware or treated them as not owing and thus his unverified statement sufficed	Court held health-care expenses qualify as support; any unpaid amounts must be stated in a sworn statement when registering the foreign order
Remedy for lack of jurisdiction due to defective registration	Herzog asked vacation of modification	Stonerook implicitly sought affirmance	Court ordered the trial court’s modification judgment vacated and dismissed the appeal because a void judgment cannot support an appeal

Key Cases Cited

Ex parte Ortiz, 108 So.3d 1046 (Ala. Civ. App.) (strict UIFSA registration required for subject-matter jurisdiction)
L.V. v. I.H., 123 So.3d 954 (Ala. Civ. App.) (treating initial petition as letter of transmittal in registration process)
Williams v. Williams, 91 So.3d 56 (Ala. Civ. App.) (Alabama courts consistently require registration before modifying foreign support orders)
Mattes v. Mattes, 60 So.3d 887 (Ala. Civ. App.) (failure to file required copies results in lack of subject-matter jurisdiction)
Owens v. Owens, 51 So.3d 364 (Ala. Civ. App.) (failure to file required copies and sworn arrearage statement rendered judgment void)
S.A.T. v. E.D., 972 So.2d 804 (Ala. Civ. App.) (registrant’s defective registration does not trigger jurisdiction)
Arvin N. Am. Auto., Inc. v. Rodgers, 71 So.3d 669 (Ala. Civ. App.) (jurisdictional defects may be noticed at any time)