248 So. 3d 10
Ala. Civ. App.2017Background
- In Sept. 2016 B.C. (the aunt) petitioned the Coffee Juvenile Court to have W.C. (age 17) declared dependent and sought custody; she also sought emergency custody.
- The mother, R.S., and the child had moved from Miami, Florida, to Alabama on July 22, 2016 (≈7 weeks before the petition).
- Parties referenced a prior Florida court action concerning the child (child had been removed from mother’s custody) but offered no details as to its nature or current status.
- The juvenile court granted emergency pendente lite custody to the aunt on Sept. 13, 2016, and later conducted a dependency hearing on Feb. 7, 2017 (mother did not appear).
- The juvenile court entered a judgment declaring the child dependent and awarding custody to the aunt; the mother’s postjudgment motion was denied and she appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Alabama juvenile court had UCCJEA jurisdiction to make an initial custody determination | Aunt: Alabama is an proper forum to decide dependency and custody | Mother: (implicitly) Florida may be the home state or retain jurisdiction; Alabama lacks UCCJEA basis | Reversed — record insufficient to show UCCJEA jurisdiction; trial court must determine jurisdiction with additional evidence if needed |
| Whether Alabama was the child’s "home state" under UCCJEA | Aunt: Child lived in Alabama when petition filed, so Alabama has jurisdiction | Mother: Child lived in Florida until July 22, 2016; Florida may be home state | Court: Child had lived in Alabama <6 months before filing, so Alabama likely not home state; UCCJEA home-state inquiry unresolved in record |
| Effect of existing Florida court action on jurisdiction | Aunt: Did not establish that Florida retained or declined jurisdiction | Mother: Prior Florida action could establish Florida jurisdiction or continuing jurisdiction | Court: Record lacked information about the Florida proceeding; could not determine if Florida retained jurisdiction or had declined to exercise it |
| Validity of emergency pendente lite custody order and its effect on dependency ruling | Aunt: Emergency order justified temporary custody and supports proceeding | Mother: Emergency order does not confer jurisdiction to make final dependency/custody determination | Court: Emergency jurisdiction valid for temporary custody only; it does not authorize final dependency/custody rulings under UCCJEA |
Key Cases Cited
- M.B. v. B.B., 244 So.3d 128 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017) (dependency is a child-custody proceeding under the UCCJEA; emergency jurisdiction cannot supply final custody jurisdiction)
- J.D. v. Lauderdale Cty. Dep't of Human Res., 121 So.3d 381 (Ala. Civ. App. 2013) (distinguishes emergency pendente lite jurisdiction from authority to make initial custody determinations under UCCJEA)
- Ex parte Siderius, 144 So.3d 319 (Ala. 2013) (construing “home state” definitions in the UCCJEA in favor of finding an existing home state)