Lee's Divorce & Family Law Blog

This started out as a quiet expression of frustration about the Alabama Supreme Court’s opinion in a recent case, Ex parte Clark. It has become instead an exploration of the role narratives play in divorce. (more)

Divorcing spouses who own businesses are fond of saying something like, “well there’s two trucks, three desks, a computer, and a bunch of buckets.” I guess it’s worth $_______,” offering some ridiculously low-ball value as the portion that should be shared in divorce. Now a trial court has accepted that theory in valuing a restaurant business, and the appeals court has said “no way.” (more)

This case on working to “undo” an earlier termination of parental rights is useful in clarifying why parents can’t just agree to terminate the parental rights of one of them as part of their divorce. This is a common request parents make to divorce lawyers in Alabama, and from now on when people make it I’ll refer them to this note. (more)

Poor Ted Brown. Luckless in love, and doomed to have his own death set off a struggle between his former wife and the new wife he left behind. (more)

This case doesn’t break new legal ground, but it’s a good reminder of several of the principles that tend to come up in high-asset divorce cases in Alabama. (more)

Courts in Alabama can change alimony after the decree if there’s a material change in circumstances, and a court can extend an award of rehabilitative or temporary alimony beyond its original term. What happens, though, if the recipient doesn’t ask for the extension until after the original term has ended? The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals says no problem, as long as alimony is reserved in the original decree. (more)

There are some Alabama counties, notably Jefferson, where the divorce court judges are resolutely opposed to equal time parenting. We now know that this is not the case in the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals. (more)

What does it take to terminate the parental rights of a parent to a child in Alabama? This issue comes up repeatedly, and there’s no new legal ground covered in today’s case. Because it comes up so often, however, let’s explore it. (more)

The issues aren’t all that striking in this case dealing with the setting of child support based on self-employment income. What’s interesting is the palpable tension between the Shelby County Circuit Court judge and the appeals court. (more)

A juvenile court in Alabama has limited jurisdiction. It begins with a finding that a child is dependent. Without that finding, the juvenile court has no power, and every action it takes in a case is void. (more)

The Alabama Department of Human Resources comes under plenty of criticism for letting child abuse continue after knowing about it, and plenty of other criticism for intervening too much in people’s private lives. Today’s case is one of those where DHR seems to be muddling through the best way it knows. Can’t say I would do it any differently. (more)

The doctrine of integrated bargain for alimony in Alabama has always been a curious thing, a principle that, in a sense, seeks to have it both ways. Now the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals seems to have decided to torpedo it, sort of. (more)

Yesterday we looked at when the juvenile court and the divorce court have concurrent jurisdiction in dealing with the same child. Today we look at another question about that concurrent jurisdiction, namely whether a juvenile court judge who sometimes serves as a circuit judge can change roles in the middle of a juvenile court case. (more)

This one usually gets me confused, so I’ll sure forgive the Talladega County juvenile intake officer for missing it, and I hope you will too. Today’s note is all about the concurrent jurisdiction of the juvenile court and the domestic relations (divorce) court, and you can read about it in Ex parte G.L., Case No. 2080260 (Ala. Civ. App. February 27, 2009). (more)

Does an award of child support mean the recipient is awarded custody of the child, even if the court never says so? The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals has answered with a resounding “Uh, yeah, I guess so.” You can read it in M.R.J. v. D.R.B., Case No. 2070487 (Ala. Civ. App. February 27, 2009). (more)

I noticed an article on the BBC this morning called Tax credit ‘led to more divorces’ and it got me thinking about what I’m seeing now in my practice. I’m seeing more people cooperating (after all, because of the nature of my practice, the cooperative couples are the ones I see) to divorce to save money. (more)

Oh my. This one’s going to generate some conversation. I’m innocently scanning law review articles yesterday and I come across this one from Reginald Mombrun at the Florida A&M University College of Law in Orlando, An End to the Deadbeat Dad Dilemma? - Puncturing the Paradigm by Allowing a Deduction for Child Support Payments, 13 Fordham J. Corp. & Fin. L. 211 (2008). (more)

Thanks to Noah Funderburg at the University of Alabama College of Law for spotting this one and passing word of it around. The Alabama Supreme Court has amended the provision governing Alabama child support to provide more flexible options for health coverage for Alabama children. (more)

Judges keep trying it and litigants keep trying it and it never works. You just can’t set child support without filling out those CS forms. We have the latest example in J.M. v. C.M., Case No. 2071223 (Ala. Civ. App. Feb. 13, 2009). (more)

After an unfortunate journey into a land where a non-custodial parent could not change custody of a child without showing an “overwhelming necessity” to make the change, the Alabama law seems firmly settled now that the original McLendon standard prevails. The latest case from the Alabama Supreme Court continues the process of clearing up the confusion. Ex parte Russell, Case No. 1070726 (Ala. January 16, 2009). The facts are pretty ordinary (Mom and Dad both substance abusers, Mom more recently and more intensely than Dad, some shouting about where the child should live, etc.); what makes this one worth reading is the Supreme Court’s statement of the law. (more)