author: DONALDSON, Judge.

text:
    Nicole HICKS v. Arielious DAVIS
    2161042
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    June 29, 2018
    Joshua J. Holcomb, Ozark, for appellant.
    Submitted on appellant's brief only.
   DONALDSON, Judge.

Nicole Hicks ("the mother") appeals from a judgment of the Barbour Circuit Court ("the circuit court") granting her and Arielious Davis ("the father") joint custody of K.D. ("the child"). The materials before us establish that the circuit court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to enter the judgment. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal with instructions.

The record shows that, in 2013, the State of Alabama, on behalf of the mother, petitioned the Barbour Juvenile Court ("the juvenile court"), seeking to collect child support from the father; that action was docketed as case no. CS-13-14 ("the child-support action"). On May 6, 2013, after a hearing at which both the mother and the father were present, the juvenile court entered a judgment ordering the father to pay $246 per month in child support and retroactive child support of $430 per month. On March 16, 2017, the State of Alabama filed a motion in the child-support action seeking to redirect payments of child support to the mother after having received a handwritten request from the mother stating that she would like to "take [the father] off child support." The juvenile court granted the motion that same day. There is no indication that the May 6, 2013, judgment of the juvenile court was vacated.

In 2016, the father filed a petition for protection from abuse against the mother in the circuit court, which was docketed as case no. DR-16-45 ("the protection-from-abuse action"). The mother apparently filed a counterpetition for protection from abuse. On August 29, 2016, the circuit court entered an order granting both the mother's and the father's petitions. At some point thereafter, the father filed a motion in the protection-from-abuse action asserting that the mother had violated the protection-from-abuse order. On October 13, 2016, the circuit court granted the father temporary custody of the child. On October 20, 2016, after a hearing, the circuit court entered an order in the protection-from-abuse action noting that it was withholding ruling on the father's motion until the disposition of the mother's pending criminal charges with the City of Eufaula. The circuit court further ordered that custody of the child would remain with the father pending further orders.

On October 17, 2016, the father filed a petition in the circuit court seeking custody of the child, which was docketed as case no. DR-16-58 ("the custody action"). In his petition, the father asserted, among other things, that the mother had placed the child in danger. The mother filed an answer denying the assertions in the father's petition. On March 30, 2017, after a hearing, the circuit court entered a pendente lite order in the custody action that, among other things, granted the mother unsupervised visitation with the child every other weekend. On July 18, 2017, the circuit court held a trial on the father's petition for custody.

On July 18, 2017, the circuit court entered a judgment in the custody action that, among other things, granted the mother and the father joint custody of the child with each party alternating weekly physical custody of the child. The circuit court also ordered that "[e]ach party shall continue to abide by the Protection from Abuse Orders" and that "[c]hild support shall remain in the jurisdiction of the [Juvenile] Court as previously determined as to monthly support and arrearages."

On July 24, 2017, the mother filed a motion seeking to alter, amend, or vacate the judgment. In her motion, the mother asserted that the circuit court should have applied the standard set forth in Ex parte McLendon, 455 So.2d 863 (Ala. 1984) ("the McLendon standard") in the custody determination because the father had previously been ordered to pay child support, which, she asserted, was an implicit order awarding physical custody to the mother. To her motion, the mother attached the May 6, 2013, judgment entered in the child-support action.

On July 31, 2017, the circuit court entered an order denying the mother's postjudgment motion and finding, in part:

"A final hearing was held in this matter on July 18, 2017. Testimony was taken from the parties and other interested witnesses. The mother was represented and the father was pro se. A ruling was issued in writing following said hearing.
"This Court marked and admitted as exhibits, the prior [Juvenile] Court child support orders relevant to the proceeding at hand. No objections were made. These orders were emailed and/or faxed by the [Juvenile] Court Clerk in charge of child support files, which have not been scanned into the e-file system because of personnel shortages and lack of funding.
"These same files and orders are available as public records to any party or attorney who wishes to review them prior to a hearing.
"Included in these orders was a pro se dismissal by the mother, Nic[ ]ole Hicks, of her child support case against the father, Arielious Davis. This was apparently not known by the attorney for [the mother]. As the officer of the Court, he would have been obligated to acknowledge this fact instead of arguing that the [Juvenile] Court orders created a higher burden for custody determination.
"However, even if [the standard set forth in Ex parte McLendon, 455 So.2d 863 (Ala. 1984),] applies, the outcome would be the same.
"The parties live in the same city. They have operated and shared custody and visitation successfully since filings. Each parent participated and is engaged with the child on a frequent basis.
"Joint legal and joint physical custody is the correct ruling in this matter. This Court's order of July 18, 2017, shall remain the same and in full force and effect."

On September 7, 2017, the mother timely filed her notice of appeal to this court.

On appeal, the mother argues that the circuit court erroneously applied the best-interest-of-the-child standard, rather than the McLendon standard, to the father's petition for custody. The mother further argues that the father failed to meet the McLendon standard in order to warrant a custody modification. The father did not file a brief on appeal.

We must first determine whether the circuit court had jurisdiction to enter the July 18, 2017, judgment, and, consequently, whether this court has jurisdiction to consider the appeal, because "jurisdictional matters are of such magnitude that we take notice of them at any time and do so even ex mero motu." Nunn v. Baker, 518 So.2d 711, 712 (Ala. 1987). "A judgment entered by a court lacking subject-matter jurisdiction is absolutely void and will not support an appeal; an appellate court must dismiss an attempted appeal from such a void judgment." Vann v. Cook, 989 So.2d 556, 559 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008) (citing Hunt Transition & Inaugural Fund, Inc. v. Grenier, 782 So.2d 270, 274 (Ala. 2000) ). We asked the parties to submit letter briefs addressing whether the circuit court had jurisdiction to enter a custody order, in light of Moore v. Griffin, 256 So. 3d 1201 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018). The father did not respond to our request. The mother responded, asserting that the circuit court was without jurisdiction to modify or enter a custody order based on the juvenile court's previous adjudication of custody.

We recently considered a similar procedural and factual situation in Moore v. Griffin, in which we explained:

"The facts of this case parallel those of Ex parte Washington, 176 So.3d 852 (Ala. Civ. App. 2015), in which the State prevailed in an action in juvenile court seeking child support from a father of a child born out of wedlock, after which that father filed a domestic-relations action in the circuit court seeking to " 'establish custody.' " 176 So.3d at 853. The father in Washington then sought mandamus review in this court of certain orders entered in the domestic-relations action; however, this court, ex mero motu, dismissed the petition as having sought review of void orders of the circuit court. 176 So.3d at 854. We reasoned:
" 'A juvenile court has original jurisdiction over actions to establish paternity. § 12-15-115(a)(6), Ala. Code 1975. Section 12-15-115(a)(7), Ala. Code 1975, provides that juvenile courts have original jurisdiction in "[p]roceedings to establish, modify, or enforce support, visitation, or custody when a juvenile court previously has established parentage." Our supreme court has held that an order requiring a man to pay child support is an implicit judicial determination of paternity. See Ex parte State ex rel. G.M.F., 623 So.2d 722, 723 (Ala. 1993) (holding that an order requiring a man to pay child support was an implicit "judicial determination of paternity qualifying for res judicata finality"). Likewise, this court has determined that an award of support to one parent constitutes an implicit award of custody to that parent. See T.B. v. C.D.L., 910 So.2d 794, 796 (Ala. Civ. App. 2005) ; M.R.J. v. D.R.B., 17 So.3d 683, 686 (Ala. Civ. App. 2009).
" 'In this case, the limited materials submitted to us indicate that the juvenile court has previously entered a judgment ordering the father to pay child support to the mother; thus, the juvenile court has made implicit determinations as to paternity and custody .... Pursuant to § 12-15-117(c), Ala. Code 1975, the juvenile court "shall retain jurisdiction over an individual of any age to enforce or modify any prior orders of the juvenile court unless otherwise provided by law...."
" 'Because the materials submitted to us indicate that the juvenile court has entered judgments regarding support and custody of the child, it "shall retain jurisdiction" to modify those orders. Therefore, the juvenile court, not the circuit court, has jurisdiction over the father's petition for custody in this case. Id. '
" 176 So.3d at 853-54."

256 So. 3d at 1203-04.

Similarly, in this case, the record establishes that the juvenile court entered a judgment in the child-support action in 2013, which implicitly determined paternity and custody of the child. Id. Regardless of whether the mother later sought to have the child-support payments redirected or terminated, the juvenile court exercised original jurisdiction over the child-support action and, thus, has original jurisdiction "to establish, modify, or enforce support, visitation, or custody." § 12-15-115(a)(7), Ala. Code 1975.

Because the circuit court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction in the custody action to enter the July 18, 2017, order addressing custody, that order is void. See Vann, 989 So.2d at 559 ("A judgment entered by a court lacking subject-matter jurisdiction is absolutely void and will not support an appeal; an appellate court must dismiss an attempted appeal from such a void judgment."). Accordingly, we must dismiss the appeal with instructions for the circuit court to transfer the action to the juvenile court for disposition. See Williams v. Minor, 202 So.3d 676, 678-79 (Ala. Civ. App. 2016) (dismissing an appeal from a void judgment with instructions to circuit court to transfer the action to the juvenile court); see also Moore, 256 So. 3d at 1205 (citing § 12-11-11, Ala. Code 1975; Williams, 202 So.3d at 678-79 ; and Ex parte E.S., 205 So.3d 1245 (Ala. 2015) ).

APPEAL DISMISSED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

Thompson, P.J., and Pittman, Thomas, and Moore, JJ., concur.

      Neither the father's nor the mother's petitions are contained in the record.


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    Janice Elaine WILSON v. Earle Frederick WILSON III
    2150535
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    M.M. v. S.A.S. and A.W.
    2150961
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 25, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Ronnie HOPSON v. LILLY, LLC, and Chae H. Bucz
    2150836
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Pjeter Pero VUCINAJ v. Rebecca Jo VUCINAJ
    2150982
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 21, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    J.G. v. B.G.
    2160059
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 11, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Cecelia N. KING v. Anna Belle L. NEWMAN
    2160042
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 4, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Reh. denied.


text:
    D.L.F. v. JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160085
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    A.M. v. V.G. and M.G.
    2160001
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 7, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Reh. denied.


text:
    George Franklin PFEIFFER v. Yvonne Joyce PFEIFFER
    2160116
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 22, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Tony SMITH v. Kandie Mechelle SMITH
    2160104
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Donald P. BALDAUF v. Julia Helen BALDAUF
    2160113
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Reh. denied.


text:
    RENASANT BANK f/k/a M & F Bank v. A.W. CLARK and Janice Clark
    2160097
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 7, 2017 Reh. denied September 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Angelica JONES v. Jonathan Scott JONES
    2160153
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 11, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Brandi Faye EDWARDS v. Jamie Russell COFIELD
    2160160
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Brannon Steiner LAFORCE v. Sharon Badon LAFORCE
    2160162
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017 Reh. denied September 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    IT ALL, INC., It All Leasing, L.L.C., Roller Knights, L.L.C., and Jim Wilhelm v. Austin HINDS, Randall Ferguson, Jacqueline Hinds, and Ferguson Properties, LLC
    2160154
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 14, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Reh. denied.


text:
    James CREECH v. CITIZENS BANK & TRUST, Arvel Wilson, and Rebekah Wilson
    2160165
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Charles QUICK and Donald Quick v. Kerry PRIVETT and KC's Tree Service
    2160178
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Joesph Elmer FREEMAN v. Kristen Michelle FREEMAN
    2160179
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 14, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Brandon FRAZIER v. Maranda C. FRAZIER
    2160195
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 14, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Reh. denied.


text:
    Demarkus BOYKIN v. Kimberly BOYKIN
    2160223
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 8, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Jonathan FULLER v. ALABAMA SCHOOL OF FINE ARTS
    2160201
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 4, 2017 Reh. denied September 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Misty MCGREW v. Benjamin MCGREW
    2160207
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Joseph Lee THOMAS v. Gina HILL
    2160198
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 21, 2017 Reh. denied September 8, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Michael Sheldon POOLE v. Melanie Holley POOLE
    2160239
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    D.M. v. MORGAN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160245
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 2, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    D.M. v. MORGAN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160246
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 2, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Robert Ewing MCALISTER, Jr. v. Shelley Jean MCALISTER
    2160225
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    L.K. v. R.S.
    2160250
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    L.K. v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160251
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    L.K. v. R.S.
    2160252
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    D.M. v. MORGAN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160247
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 2, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Rex Alan SHERER v. Lisa Lee SHERER
    2160258
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Larry WILLIAMS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Ruby Jo Williams v. Shirley OTWELL SMITH
    2160262
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 25, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    L.K. v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160253
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    JACKSON COUNTY COMMISSION v. Christopher ALLEN
    2160257
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    A.B. v. V.R.
    2160270
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 25, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Terri Michelle NIXON v. William Thomas NIXON
    2160264
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 2, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    FIVE STAR FOOD SERVICE, INC. v. Florence Ruby RUSSELL
    2160273
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 14, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    T.L.B.P. and S.L.P. v. LEE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160274
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 14, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Dennis L. RUSHING v. DISCOVER BANK
    2160283
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 21, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    W.R.G. v. J.R.V.
    2160291
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 19, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    T.L.B.P. and S.L.P. v. LEE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160275
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 14, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    N.S. v. ETOWAH COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160276
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 14, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Briana L. MAYES v. Austyn P. MAYES
    2160309
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 8, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Tonya A. EASON v. Ronald J. EASON
    2160302
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    John RICE v. Rhonda RICE
    2160328
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 17, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    R.B. v. J.M.
    2160311
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 13, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Transferred to Jefferson Cir. Ct. for trial de novo pursuant to Rule 28(D), Ala. R.Juv.P.


text:
    Billy Wayne HANBACK v. Cheryl Ann HANBACK
    2160337
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    S.T. and R.F. v. CHAMBERS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160349
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Lee EAKINS v. Mark WILSON, Carolyn Dobbs, Karen Sullivan, David Maxey, and Jennifer Dollar
    2160330
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Reh. denied.


text:
    William N. LUCY v. ALABAMA CRIME VICTIMS COMPENSATION COMMISSION
    2160354
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017 Reh. denied September 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Victoria BECKER v. Patrick DANLEY
    2160379
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 13, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Greta Jameth MCDONALD v. SOUTHERN HAULERS, LLC
    2160384
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 29, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Samantha LEWIS v. Eric LEWIS
    2160390
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    JOHN G. WALTON CONSTRUCTION CO. v. Michael E. STRICKLIN
    2160383
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 17, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Robert LITTLETON III v. STATE
    2160403
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Jim KNOX II v. MICHELIN NORTH AMERICA, INC.
    2160402
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    C.D. v. CLEBURNE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160395
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Lee EAKINS v. Mark WILSON, Dolores Johnson, and Jefferson County Department of Public Health
    2160398
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Reh. denied.


text:
    C.M. v. JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160422
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 8, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    C.M. v. JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160423
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 8, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    C.M. v. JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160421
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 8, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    M.J.B. v. CHEROKEE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160430
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 25, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    T.W. v. JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160436
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 22, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Lance William PARKER v. MUNICIPALITY OF OXFORD
    2160467
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 8, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Christopher Michael ROWLAND v. Amber Leigh Ann ROWLAND
    2160444
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Bobby PARKER v. RAINBOW FOOD MART
    2160437
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Robert FLORA v. Julia FLORA
    2160468
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    S.R. v. HOUSTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160476
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Ida Le Blanc SWIFT v. David Dauphin SWIFT, Sr.
    2160470
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    WEST PACE, LLC v. U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
    2160474
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Pamdoria ACOFF v. David ACOFF
    2160485
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 29, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Luke GRANT and Nicole Grant v. Jerry TURNER
    2160483
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 22, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Sara Ellen CLARK v. REED ENERGY, LLC
    2160488
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 22, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    V.A. v. MOBILE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160487
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    A.P. and W.P. v. BALDWIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160499
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 8, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    A.P. and W.P. v. BALDWIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160500
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 8, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    T.M. and M.H. v. C.M.
    2160493
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 26, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Transferred to Jefferson Cir. Ct. for trial de novo pursuant to Rule 28(D), Ala. R.Juv.P.


text:
    LaShanda S. MCDANIEL v. Willie J. MCDANIEL II
    2160490
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 25, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    James Burton GUIN v. Lori Wallace GUIN
    2160516
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 24, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Felicia PARKER v. GREATER GADSDEN HOUSING AUTHORITY
    2160515
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 11, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    T.S. v. CHEROKEE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160505
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    T.S. v. CHEROKEE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160506
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    K.P.B. v. FAYETTE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160541
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 22, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Danny POWELL v. Kenya MADISON
    2160533
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Chad M. STEVENS v. Leslie M. TRIPPE
    2160555
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 25, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    A.H. v. J.H.
    2160546
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 25, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Transferred to Madison Cir. Ct. for trial de de novo pursuant to Rule 28(D), Ala. R.Juv.P.


text:
    Dona BUNTON v. Tymoth Wayne BUNTON
    2160564
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    C.H. v. MARENGO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160571
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    C.H. v. MARENGO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160572
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Albert DIAL v. Lela DIAL
    2160567
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 25, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    John RICE v. Richelle Webster RICE
    2160574
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Timothy Edward PRUITT v. Paige Pruitt SPRAYBERRY
    2160576
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Raymond Donovan WILLIAMS v. STATE
    2160578
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 25, 2017 Reh. denied September 27, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    C.H. v. MARENGO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160573
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Tymoth Wayne BUNTON v. Dona BUNTON
    2160594
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 15, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Michael D. GLOVER v. Teri Lee GLOVER
    2160593
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 10, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Kartarius JOHNSON v. Richard JOHNSON
    2160586
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 9, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Fredrick CHATMAN and Kathy Chatman v. RES-AL TWO, LLC
    2160585
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 31, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    T.J. v. TUSCALOOSA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160595
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 8, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    T.J. v. TUSCALOOSA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160596
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 8, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    T.J. v. TUSCALOOSA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160597
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 8, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    D.F.S. v. B.L.
    2160604
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 7, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    James Michael FORBUS v. Jean Carlton FORBUS
    2160615
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Edward W. KYTTLE v. WMW LAND, LLC
    2160621
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 21, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Eric Vernardo ODOM v. STATE
    2160625
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 17, 2017 August 29, 2017-Order of 08/17/2017 set aside
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Transferred to the Ct. of Crim. App. for lack subject-matter jurisdiction.

Dismissed.


text:
    D.F.S. v. B.L.
    2160605
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 8, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    A.D. v. CULLMAN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160629
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 27, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    A.D. v. CULLMAN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160630
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 27, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    A.D. v. CULLMAN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160631
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 27, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    A.D. v. CULLMAN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160632
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 27, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    BASS GLOVE, LLC v. Jeff HALL
    2160634
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 5, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    J.L.P. v. J.S.W.
    2160638
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 10, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Transferred to Cullman Cir. Ct. for trial de novo pursuant to Rule 28(D), Ala. R.Juv.P.


text:
    Jennifer Amanda TAYLOR v. Donald Brian MOTON
    2160660
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    A.D. v. CULLMAN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160633
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 27, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Ronald D. VETETO v. Jeff DUNN, DeWayne Estes, Cedric Specks, Anthony Brooks, Kevin White, Gary Malone, William Northcutt, Bruce Hodge, Jonathan Truitt, John Mason, Wendell Guthery, March Jones, Christopher McLaurin, Mark Michael, James Barton, Jasper Luitze, Cory Martin, Michael Williamson, and Dameta Baldwin.
    2160668
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 21, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Bridget M. SHARP v. Robert L. SNODDY, Jr.
    2160675
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Amy Renea HENLEY v. Henry Jason HENLEY
    2160665
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 10, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Edward W. KYTTLE
    (In re WMW Land, LLC v. Edward W. Kyttle)
    2160663
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 6, 2017 Reh. denied August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    S.T. v. SHELBY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160679
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 25, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    S.T. v. SHELBY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160680
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 25, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Christina ESTES v. TENNESSEE VALLEY PRINTING CO.
    2160677
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 7, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE TTR CONSTRUCTION, LLC, et al.
    (In re Sunbelt Rentals, Inc. v. TTR Construction, LLC, and Carolyn Robinson)
    2160678
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Reh. denied.


text:
    H.M.A. IV v. J.M. and J.M.
    2160691
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 29, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Christopher BADGER v. Laura BADGER
    2160690
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 22, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Frances MACK v. Alan ARBER
    2160682
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 13, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    L.G. v. E.A. and V.A.
    2160688
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 2, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    K.L.R. v. M.D.O. and J.C.O.
    2160714
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 23, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    W.C., Jr. v. FRANKLIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160719
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 2, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    R.D. v. SHELBY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160716
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 19, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    S.T. and J.T. v. M.I.
    2160713
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 10, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Transferred to Barbour Cir. Ct. for trial de novo, pursuant to Rule 28(D), Ala. R.Juv.P.


text:
    Martevious Shonta YOUNG v. Tilia JOHNSON
    2160736
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 13, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    William Gregory WHITSON v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
    2160723
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 11, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    W.C., Jr. v. FRANKLIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160720
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 2, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE A.L.M.
    (In re H.R.G. v. A.L.M.)
    2160728
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 26, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    TRANSPORT CORPORATION OF AMERICA d/b/a Transport America v. Rodney CLAYTON
    2160750
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 22, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Jason ELKINS and Paula Elkins v. Jeff CARROLL, Stanley Maguire, Gabriel Collins, and TDY Industries, LLC
    2160745
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Affirmed.


text:
    Zaid HAKIM f/k/a Eric William Ellington v. Blake DORNING, Madison County Sheriff & Alabama Law Enforcement Agency
    2160747
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 25, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Imperial Emperor Marcus O. TATE, El-Bey-Tey Washitaw
    (In re Emperor Marcus Tate v. Alabama President Pro Tempore et al.)
    2160746
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 14, 2017 Reh. denied July 25, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    Christopher LA FONTAINE v. Yvonne TRIPLETT
    2160755
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 10, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    F.S. v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160754
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 20, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    MARSHALL COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES v. J.V.
    2160761
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 14, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE MARSHALL COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    (In re Marshall County Department of Human Resources v. J.V.)
    2160757
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 10, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mand. pet. granted.


text:
    George E. WILLIAMS v. Charles PAYNE
    2160780
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 22, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    J.D. v. P.M.
    2160783
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    J.D. v. P.M.
    2160782
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    CLAYTON PROVIDERS, INC. v. James ROPER et al.
    2160771
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 3, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Jose MORGADO v. SOUTHERN WALL SYSTEMS
    2160788
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 19, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Daniel Eric COBBLE v. Stephanie Anne LOCKHART and Paul Curtis Lockhart
    2160787
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 13, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Daniel Eric COBBLE v. Chris MAY, Circuit Clerk of Randolph County
    2160786
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 13, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    TREADWELL FORD, INC. v. Angela L. BROWN
    2160789
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 13, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Sherry C. ROLLINS
    (In re Sherry Carroll Rollins v. Shawn Taylor Henson)
    2160793
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 26, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    Donna M. GIBSON v. David J. MALONEY
    2160815
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 23, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    A.N.S. v. P.C.N.
    2160792
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Transferred to Jefferson Cir. Ct. for trial de novo pursuant to Rule 28(D), Ala. R.Juv.P.


text:
    Clay SLATE v. Dawn Kelly STRONG
    2160805
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 3, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    L.M. and J.K. v. SHELBY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160842
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Jeffrey S. KHLEIF
    (In re Jeffrey S. Khleif v. Millane Copeland Khleif)
    2160838
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE M.A.M.J.
    (In re: M.W. v. M.J.)
    2160824
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 26, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    EX PARTE M.A.M.J.
    (In re M.J. v. M.W.)
    2160825
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    July 26, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    S.D.P. v. C.B.E.
    2160853
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 24, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Jarvis Lavel TUNSTALL v. Torsa Lafaya TUNSTALL
    2160847
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    J.P. v. A.S.
    2160846
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 17, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Imperial Emperor Marcus O. TATE, El-Bey-Tey Washitaw
    (In re: Emperor Marcus Tate v. Alabama President Pro Tempore et al.)
    2160855
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 11, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Petition for writ of prohibition dismissed.


text:
    STATE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES v. T.J.
    2160858
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 21, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Markeisha THOMAS v. Adrian R. EDMONDS
    2160864
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 13, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE J.S.
    (In re: the Adoption Petition of E.S.H. and S.M.H.)
    2160867
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE J.S.
    (In re: the Adoption Petition of E.S.H. and S.M.H.)
    2160868
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    Adrian R. EDMONDS v. Markeisha THOMAS
    2160888
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 13, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Carol Martin REID
    (In re: Eugene D. Reid II v. Carol Martin Reid)
    2160873
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 13, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mand. pet. denied.


text:
    Kenneth K. SEXTON v. Christine SEXTON
    2160896
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 13, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE A.B.
    (In re: T.L.M. v. A.P.B.)
    2160894
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    August 18, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    Gary BELL v. Jon GARLICK
    2160911
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 28, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    R.A.G. v. ETOWAH COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160943
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 13, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Transferred to Etowah Cir. Ct. for trial de novo pursuant to Rule 28(D), Ala. R.Juv.P.


text:
    R.A.G. v. ETOWAH COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160944
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 13, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Transferred to Etowah Cir. Ct. for trial de novo pursuant to Rule 28(D), Ala. R.Juv.P.


text:
    R.A.G. v. ETOWAH COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160942
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 13, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Transferred to Etowah Cir. Ct. for trial de novo pursuant to Rule 28(D), Ala. R.Juv.P.


text:
    R.A.G. v. ETOWAH COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160945
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 13, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Transferred to Etowah Cir. Ct. for trial de novo pursuant to Rule 28(D), Ala. R.Juv.P.


text:
    R.R. v. A.C.
    2160963
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 7, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Transferred to Randolph Cir. Ct. for trial de novo pursuant to Rule 28(D), Ala. R.Juv.P.


text:
    R.R. v. A.C.
    2160964
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 7, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Transferred to Randolph Cir. Ct. for trial de novo pursuant to Rule 28(D), Ala. R.Juv.P.


text:
    EX PARTE Mitchell Bryant OWENS, Sr.
    (In re: Cristal Owens v. Mitchell Bryant Owens, Sr.)
    2160962
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 1, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mand. pet. dismissed.


text:
    EX PARTE Wendy Franks FANCHER
    (In re: Robert Allen Fancher v. Wendy Franks Fancher)
    2161068
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 29, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Mand. pet. granted.


text:
    S.H. and C.H. v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160974
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 6, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    S.H. and C.H. v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
    2160975
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    September 6, 2017
    DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION
   Dismissed.


text:
    C.B.W.N. v. K.P.R.
    2160950
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    February 23, 2018 Certiorari Denied June 8, 2018
    Alabama Supreme Court 1170626
    Scott Harwell, Chelsea, for appellant.
    Erin B. Welborn, Columbiana, for appellee.
   DONALDSON, Judge.

C.B.W.N. ("the stepfather") appeals from an order of the Shelby Probate Court ("the probate court") that, among other things, granted the contest of K.P.R. ("the father") to the proposed adoption of C.A.R. ("the child") by the stepfather, denied the stepfather's petition to adopt the child, and dismissed the adoption proceeding. Based on the current interpretation of § 26-10A-26, Ala. Code 1975, the appeal was required to be filed within 14 days of the entry of the order. Because the appeal was filed more than 14 days after the entry of the order, this court is without jurisdiction and we dismiss the appeal. Rule 2(a)(1), Ala. R. App. P.

Facts and Procedural History

The facts pertinent to the disposition of this appeal are as follows. On October 24, 2016, the stepfather filed a petition in the probate court seeking to adopt the child. The father filed an answer to the stepfather's petition in which he contested the adoption. On May 8, 2017, after a hearing at which ore tenus testimony was taken, the probate court entered a detailed final order in which it, among other things, found that the father had not impliedly consented to the adoption, granted the father's contest to the adoption, denied the stepfather's adoption petition, and dismissed the adoption proceeding.

On May 18, 2017, the stepfather filed a motion seeking to alter, amend, or vacate the May 8, 2017, order. On June 9, 2017, the probate court entered an order setting the stepfather's postjudgment motion for a hearing on August 2, 2017. On August 10, 2017, the probate court entered an order denying the stepfather's postjudgment motion. The stepfather filed his notice of appeal to this court on August 21, 2017. This court has appellate jurisdiction of appeals from adoption proceedings pursuant to § 12-3-1, Ala. Code 1975.

Discussion

Before reaching the merits of the stepfather's arguments, we must determine whether the stepfather's notice of appeal was timely filed because "an untimely filed notice of appeal results in a lack of appellate jurisdiction." Parker v. Parker, 946 So.2d 480, 485 (Ala. Civ. App. 2006). See also Rule 2(a)(1), Ala. R. App. P. ("An appeal shall be dismissed if the notice of appeal was not timely filed to invoke the jurisdiction of the appellate court.").

In his brief, the father asserts that the stepfather's notice of appeal was not timely and that, therefore, this court should dismiss the stepfather's appeal. In response, the stepfather filed a motion asking this court to deem his appeal to have been timely filed, to which he attached a memorandum in support.

The stepfather argues that the order from which he appealed is not a "final decree of adoption" that must be appealed within 14 days pursuant to § 26-10A-26(a), Ala. Code 1975. The stepfather cites J.B.M. v. J.C.M., 142 So.3d 676 (Ala. Civ. App. 2013), in support of his position. In J.B.M., this court held that "the period for filing a notice of appeal from the denial of a Rule 60(b)[, Ala. R. Civ. P.,] motion pertaining to an adoption proceeding before the probate court is 42 days pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1), Ala. R. App. P." 142 So.3d at 682. A motion filed pursuant to Rule 60(b), Ala. R. Civ. P., however, "does not bring up for review the merits of the underlying judgment and is instead a collateral attack on the judgment." Ex parte R.S.C., 853 So.2d 228, 233 (Ala. Civ. App. 2002). Further, a motion filed pursuant to Rule 60(b)"does not affect the finality of a judgment or suspend its operation," and the motion "is not deemed denied by operation of law ...." Id. at 233-34. Accordingly, J.B.M. is inapplicable to the present situation.

Our supreme court, in considering the interplay between Rule 21(a)(3), Ala. R. App. P., and § 26-10A-26(a), has held that it is "clear that the presumptively reasonable time for filing a mandamus petition challenging an order in an adoption proceeding is 14 days." Ex parte K.R., 210 So.3d 1106, 1111 (Ala. 2016) (emphasis added). The supreme court's application of the 14-day appeal period in § 26-10A-26(a) to an interlocutory order-which is not a "final decree of adoption"-demonstrates that final orders entered in adoption proceedings, whether granting or denying adoption petitions, must be appealed within 14 days.

The stepfather also argues that the Code of Alabama and the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure do not contemplate a 14-day period pertaining to the filing of, and the ruling on, postjudgment motions. This court has held that the 14-day period for appeals from adoption judgments is applicable to postjudgment practice in adoption proceedings. See, e.g., Ex parte W.L.K., 175 So.3d 652, 656 n. 1 (Ala. Civ. App. 2015) ; see also R.W.S. v. C.B.D., 244 So.3d 987 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017). The stepfather asks this court to "correct" what he asserts is "bad dicta" in a footnote in Ex parte W.L.K."as being contrary to the plain language of the applicable laws and rules set out in the Code of Alabama and the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure."

In Ex parte W.L.K., however, this court relied on Ex parte A.M.P., 997 So.2d 1008 (Ala. 2008), which included several appeals and a petition for a writ of mandamus that had been consolidated and in which our supreme court explained that the appellants in that case had filed a postjudgment motion within 14 days of the entry of the adoption judgment, that that motion had been denied by operation of law 14 days after its filing, and that the appellants' notice of appeal, which had been filed within 14 days of the denial by operation of law of the postjudgment motion, was timely. Id. at 1013. It is well settled that "this court is bound by the decisions of our supreme court. Ala. Code 1975, § 12-3-16. We are not at liberty to overrule or modify those decisions. Thompson v. Wasdin, 655 So.2d 1058 (Ala. Civ. App. 1995)." TenEyck v. TenEyck, 885 So.2d 146, 158 (Ala. Civ. App. 2003).

The probate court entered its final order on May 8, 2017. Although the stepfather timely filed his postjudgment motion within 14 days of the entry of the order (on May 18, 2017), that motion was denied by operation of law 14 days later-on June 1, 2017. Therefore, the stepfather's notice of appeal was due to be filed no later than 14 days after the date his postjudgment motion was denied by operation of law-June 15, 2017. Because the stepfather did not file his notice of appeal until August 21, 2017, it was not timely filed and, as a result, this court lacks jurisdiction to consider the stepfather's appeal. See Ex parte A.M.P., 997 So.2d at 1013 ; and K.P. v. Madison Cty. Dep't of Human Res., 243 So.3d 835, 839 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017) ("The Rules of Appellate Procedure do not permit this court to construe [an appellant's] notices of appeal to be timely."). Accordingly, we dismiss the stepfather's appeal. Rule 2(a)(1), Ala. R. App. P.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

Thompson, P.J., and Pittman and Moore, JJ., concur.

Thomas, J., concurs specially.

THOMAS, Judge, concurring specially.

I concur in the main opinion, but I have additional reasons for rejecting the arguments asserted by C.B.W.N. ("the stepfather").

The stepfather first argues that Ala. Code 1975, § 26-10A-26(a), indicates that an appeal from only a "final decree of adoption" must be filed within 14 days, and, thus, he contends, his appeal from the judgment denying his adoption petition and dismissing the adoption action was not required to be filed within 14 days of its entry. Of course, the stepfather admits that he filed his notice of appeal to this court within 14 days of the entry of the order denying his postjudgment motion, and, therefore, resolving this particular argument is not necessary for this court to decide whether it has jurisdiction over this appeal. I note, however, that this court has jurisdiction over "all appeals in domestic relations cases, including annulment, divorce, adoption, and child custody cases," Ala. Code 1975, § 12-3-10 (emphasis added), and that the Comment to § 26-10A-26 states that a direct appeal to this court is "consistent with ... Section 12-3-10." This court, in In re Hicks, 495 So.2d 691, 692 (Ala. Civ. App. 1986), explained:

"The general statute as to appeals from the probate court, which has been in effect for over a century without any material change, provides in pertinent part that an appeal lies to the circuit court or supreme court from any final decree of the probate court. § 12-22-20, Code 1975. However, when the court of civil appeals was established in 1969, this court was granted exclusive appellate jurisdiction as to all appeals in adoption cases. § 12-3-10, Code 1975."

(Emphasis added.) Thus, final judgments in all adoption actions are appealable to this court.

The stepfather's second argument is more difficult to address. The stepfather specifically contends that footnote 1 in Ex parte W.L.K., 175 So.3d 652 (Ala. Civ. App. 2015), is dicta and that it is also incorrect. That footnote reads:

"We note that our supreme court has indicated that a postjudgment motion directed to a judgment of adoption is timely when filed within 14 days of the entry of the judgment and that such a postjudgment motion is denied by operation of law if not ruled upon within 14 days. See Ex parte A.M.P., 997 So.2d [1008,] 1013 n.3 and accompanying text [ (Ala. 2008) ] (explaining that the adoption judgment was entered on November 8, 2005, that the postjudgment motion was 'timely filed' on November 22, 2005, that the postjudgment motion was denied by operation of law, and that the appeal, which was filed on December 16, 2005, had been timely filed)."

Ex parte W.L.K., 175 So.3d at 656 n.1. I agree that the footnote contains dicta. It was not truly necessary to decide the timeliness of the postjudgment motion or when it was denied by operation of law to decide the matters presented to us in Ex parte W.L.K. However, the footnote correctly explains the procedural history set out in Ex parte A.M.P., 997 So.2d 1008, 1013 n.3 (Ala. 2008).

At issue in A.M.P., among other things, was an appeal from a final order of adoption entered on November 8, 2005. Ex parte A.M.P., 997 So.2d at 1013. The procedural history set out in the opinion indicated that the great-uncle and great-aunt of an adoptee had filed a postjudgment motion to the November 8, 2005, judgment on November 22, 2005, which was within 14 days of the entry of the judgment. Id. at 1013. The probate court did not rule on the postjudgment motion, and the great-uncle and great-aunt filed a notice of appeal on December 16, 2005. Id. Upon a challenge to the timeliness of the great-uncle and great-aunt's appeal, our supreme court determined that the appeal had been timely filed. Id.

Indeed, as the stepfather points out, our supreme court noted in Ex parte A.M.P. that the Rules of Civil Procedure apply to adoption actions pending in the probate court. See id. at 1013 n.3 (citing Ala. Code 1975, § 12-13-12 ). Furthermore, the stepfather relies on Ala. Code 1975, § 12-13-11, which provides that a party may file a motion for new trial in the probate court within 30 days from the entry of judgment. Thus, the stepfather contends, consistent with § 12-13-11 and Rule 59, Ala. R. Civ. P., which provides that postjudgment motions in the circuit court must be filed within 30 days of the entry of judgment, Ex parte A.M.P. recognized that a postjudgment motion directed to a probate-court judgment must be filed within 30 days after the entry of the judgment. He further posits that, because the Rules of Civil Procedure apply, a postjudgment motion may remain pending before the probate court for 90 days before being denied by operation of law. See Rule 59.1, Ala. R. Civ. P. (providing that postjudgment motions are denied by operation of law if no ruling has been rendered within 90 days of the filing of the motion).

In Ex parte A.M.P., however, our supreme court indicated that the postjudgment motion filed by the great-uncle and great-aunt had been denied by operation of law in the period between its filing on November 22, 2005, and the filing of the notice of appeal on December 16, 2005, which is clearly not a period spanning 90 days. Our supreme court did not indicate that the notice of appeal filed by the great-uncle and great-aunt should have been held in abeyance pursuant to Rule 4(a)(5), Ala. R. App. P., pending the denial of their postjudgment motion by operation of law on the 90th day after its filing. Thus, based on the statements made by our supreme court in Ex parte A.M.P., this court concluded in both Ex parte W.L.K. and more recently in R.W.S. v. C.B.D., 244 So.3d 987 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017), that a postjudgment motion directed to a judgment in an adoption action must be filed within 14 days of the entry of the judgment and that the probate court must rule upon that motion within 14 days or it is deemed denied by operation of law.

Certainly, I recognize the stepfather's appropriate reliance on § 12-13-11 and the Rules of Civil Procedure. However, the dicta in Ex parte W.L.K. and the holding in R.W.S. is based on a valid interpretation of our supreme court's discussion of the timeliness of the appeal in Ex parte A.M.P. Thus, it is incumbent upon our supreme court to resolve the conflict created by the discussion in Ex parte A.M.P. It may well be that our supreme court never intended to indicate that postjudgment motions in adoption actions are to be filed within 14 days of the entry of the judgment or that such motions are denied by operation of law in only 14 days, despite the fact that such is a reasonable construction given the fact that notices of appeal are required to be filed within 14 days as a means of expediting such appeals, which are, by statutory directive, to be given precedence over other appellate matters because of the immediate need for the resolution of the adoption question. See § 26-10A-26(b) and Comment to § 26-10A-26. To allow postjudgment motions to be filed after the time for an appeal has expired seems nonsensical and, most certainly, would not promote the expedient resolution of an appeal in an adoption case. Still, the stepfather's position in the present case highlights the fact that the times applicable to postjudgment practice in adoption actions are anything but clear. Perhaps the appropriate committee should consider an amendment to the Rules of Civil Procedure or suggest legislative amendments to the probate code or the adoption code to clarify the matter.