Morgan v. Morgan
183 So. 3d 945
Ala. Civ. App.2014Background
- Husband appeals from divorce decree and contempt orders following pendente lite proceedings.
- Wife sought pendente lite relief including exclusive use of the marital residence and child custody.
- Final judgment (2012) addressed alimony, child support, and arrearages; contempt found for pendente lite nonpayment.
- Trial court awarded wife sole custody of youngest son with discretionary visitation to husband; final judgment also addressed postminority issues.
- Court later remanded for reconsideration of property division, alimony, and related fees; challenges to contempt and postjudgment orders were raised.
- Appeals were consolidated with a mandamus petition challenging contempt orders and later postjudgment rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the January 8, 2013 contempt order lacked jurisdiction | Morgan contends contempt order void for improper contempt petition | Morgan argues contempt was properly sought post-final judgment | Appeal 2120390 dismissed; contempt order void for lack of independent proceeding. |
| Validity of the September 25, 2012 order | Morgan argues lack of postjudgment jurisdiction | Wife argued final judgment pending all issues; court retained jurisdiction | September 25, 2012 order upheld on jurisdictional grounds; postjudgment motion timely. |
| Whether the trial court correctly found adultery as a basis for divorce | Morgan contends lack of pre-complaint adultery evidence; seeks recrimination defense | Wife presented circumstantial evidence and credibility findings supporting adultery | Adultery supported; dissolution affirmed to extent based on adultery. |
| Equitable division of marital property, alimony, and attorney fees | Morgan claims division and alimony were inequitable given circumstances | Wife argues distribution equitable considering adultery and assets | Property division and alimony reversed and remanded for reevaluation; attorney fees reversed for reconsideration. |
| Visitation arrangement for the youngest son | Morgan asserts visitation should not be left to child’s discretion | Wife contends discretionary visitation by child acceptable | Visitation portion reversed; remand for a schedule promoting father–son relationship and best interests. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wilcoxen v. Wilcoxen, 907 So.2d 447 (Ala.Civ.App.2005) (contempt proceedings require independent action and filing fee)
- Kyle v. Kyle, 128 So.3d 766 (Ala.Civ.App.2013) (contempt petitions and final judgments treated as independent proceedings)
- Kaufman v. Kaufman, 934 So.2d 1073 (Ala.Civ.App.2005) (reliance on independent contempt proceedings; finality of judgments)
- Mason v. Mason, 276 Ala. 265, 160 So.2d 881 (1964) (recriminate doctrine historically; no longer applicable after no-fault divorce regime)
- Parker v. Parker, 269 Ala. 299, 112 So.2d 467 (1959) (parental visitation must be determined by court, not child; guidelines on best interests)
- Yates v. Yates, 676 So.2d 365 (Ala.Civ.App.1996) (confession of adultery by spouse requires corroboration and cannot alone sustain divorce)
- Ex parte Bayliss, 550 So.2d 986 (Ala.1989) (precedent overruling; not controlling after Christopher)
- Christopher v. Ex parte, 145 So.3d 60 (Ala.2013) (overruled Bayliss; postminority education support not authorized beyond age 19)