148 So. 3d 1081
Ala. Civ. App.2014Background
- Child (M.Y.) was removed from parents and DHR obtained custody in June 2010; child was later adjudicated dependent (Oct. 2010).
- A permanency plan recommending termination of parental rights and adoption by the foster parents was approved by the juvenile court on June 26, 2012.
- Subsequent court reviews occurred, including a December 14, 2012 judicial-review order and a June 27, 2013 permanency-hearing order reiterating that DHR made reasonable efforts to finalize the permanency plan of termination and adoption.
- Mother and father each filed appeals from the June 27, 2013 permanency-hearing order; appeals were consolidated in this court.
- DHR argued the June 27, 2013 order was nonfinal and not appealable because it merely continued an existing permanency plan.
- The appellate court dismissed both appeals for lack of jurisdiction, holding the order was an administrative, nonfinal determination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the June 27, 2013 permanency-hearing order is appealable | Mother and father: court erred in approving DHR’s permanency plan (termination + adoption); appealable | DHR: order merely continued a previously approved plan and is an administrative, nonfinal ruling not subject to appeal | Dismissed — order is nonfinal and not appealable |
Key Cases Cited
- Butler v. Phillips, 3 So.3d 922 (Ala.Civ.App.2008) (final-judgment/finality principles)
- Hubbard v. Hubbard, 935 So.2d 1191 (Ala.Civ.App.2006) (duty to dismiss when judgment is not final)
- Dees v. State, 563 So.2d 1059 (Ala.Civ.App.1990) (definition of final judgment)
- Ex parte F.V.O., 145 So.3d 27 (Ala. 2013) (post-dispositional permanency-plan orders are administrative and nonfinal)