Dec 14, 2012 - v. T.J.C., J r . Appeal from Covington Circuit Court. (DR-06-306). PITTMAN ... D.M.P.C.P. v. T.J.C., 91 So. ..... standard); I.M. v. J.P.F., 668 So.
REL: 12/14/2012
Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f o r m a l r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , A l a b a m a A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r .
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013
2110700
D.M.P.C.P. v. T.J.C., J r . Appeal from Covington C i r c u i t Court (DR-06-306) PITTMAN, J u d g e . This
i s t h e second time
this court.
these
parties
have b e e n
before
I n t h e f i r s t a p p e a l , w h i c h we d i s m i s s e d a s h a v i n g
b e e n t a k e n f r o m a n o n f i n a l o r d e r , we r e c o u n t e d h i s t o r y o f t h e case
as f o l l o w s :
the procedural
2110700 "On S e p t e m b e r 11, 2007, t h e C o v i n g t o n C i r c u i t C o u r t e n t e r e d a 'Judgment o f D i v o r c e ' i n c a s e no. DR-06-306, p u r p o r t i n g t o d i v o r c e D.M.P.C.P. ('the m o t h e r ' ) and T.J.C., J r . ('the f a t h e r ' ) ; t o d i v i d e t h e i r m a r i t a l a s s e t s and d e b t s ; t o r e s e r v e t h e i s s u e s o f c u s t o d y , s u p p o r t , and v i s i t a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e p a r t i e s ' m i n o r c h i l d , T.J.C. I I I , u n t i l t h e c o n c l u s i o n of the c r i m i n a l proceedings then pending a g a i n s t t h e f a t h e r f o r s e x u a l abuse o f S.G., the m o t h e r ' s m i n o r [ d a u g h t e r ] by a f o r m e r m a r r i a g e ; and to d i r e c t the e n t r y of a f i n a l judgment pursuant t o R u l e 5 4 ( b ) , A l a . R. C i v . P. The c i r c u i t court f u r t h e r a w a r d e d p e n d e n t e l i t e c u s t o d y o f T.J.C. I I I to the mother, granted the f a t h e r visitation rights, o r d e r e d t h e f a t h e r t o pay p e n d e n t e lite c h i l d s u p p o r t , and ' r e s e r v e d j u r i s d i c t i o n t o h o l d ... f u r t h e r h e a r i n g s ... upon w r i t t e n m o t i o n o f either party.' [ 1 ]
" I n J a n u a r y 2009, t h e f a t h e r s o u g h t a h e a r i n g on the reserved issues of custody, support, and v i s i t a t i o n , a l l e g i n g t h a t he h a d b e e n a c q u i t t e d o f the criminal offense. Following ore tenus proceedings [ i n February 2010], the c i r c u i t c o u r t e n t e r e d a ' F i n a l Decree Concerning C h i l d Custody, V i s i t a t i o n , and S u p p o r t ' on J u l y 30, 2010, a w a r d i n g c u s t o d y o f T.J.C. I I I t o t h e f a t h e r ; o r d e r i n g t h e m o t h e r t o pay c h i l d s u p p o r t ; d e t e r m i n i n g t h a t t h e f a t h e r was i n a r r e a r s i n t h e payment o f p e n d e n t e
1
The
S e p t e m b e r 11, 2007, o r d e r
states:
"The [ c u s t o d y , s u p p o r t , and v i s i t a t i o n ] terms of this o r d e r , however, are o n l y pendente l i t e i n n a t u r e , and a r e , by m u t u a l c o n s e n t , n o t t o be considered f i n a l . In t h a t c o n n e c t i o n the Court r e s e r v e s j u r i s d i c t i o n to h o l d a f u r t h e r h e a r i n g or h e a r i n g s w i t h r e s p e c t t o the m a t t e r s s e t out below, and t o t h e n r e n d e r t h e u l t i m a t e j u d g m e n t t h e r e o n as t h e e v i d e n c e may w a r r a n t . I t w i l l go f o r w a r d and do so upon w r i t t e n m o t i o n o f e i t h e r p a r t y . " 2
2110700 l i t e c h i l d support; and r e s e r v i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n t o 'set the exact amount t h e r e o f i n some f u t u r e proceedings.'" D.M.P.C.P. v. T.J.C., 91 So. 3d 75, 76 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2012) . A f t e r t h e f i r s t a p p e a l was d i s m i s s e d , t h e p a r t i e s a g r e e d
that
T.J.C., J r . ("the f a t h e r " ) , owed a p e n d e n t e l i t e c h i l d - s u p p o r t arrearage a
i n t h e amount o f $850, a n d t h e t r i a l
judgment
April
a w a r d i n g D.M.P.C.P.
("the m o t h e r " )
1 1 , 2 0 1 2 . The m o t h e r t i m e l y a p p e a l e d ,
custody
court
entered
that
sum on
challenging the
award t o t h e f a t h e r . F a c t u a l Background
At t h e time of the custody h e a r i n g i n February
2010, t h e
f a t h e r was l i v i n g i n h i s p a r e n t s ' home, a t h r e e - b e d r o o m h o u s e in
t h e F l e e t a community n e a r Opp, a n d was e m p l o y e d
at
R e l i a b l e P r o d u c t s Company i n Geneva.
full-time
The m o t h e r was l i v i n g
i n h e r p a r e n t s ' home, a f o u r - b e d r o o m h o u s e i n M i l t o n ,
Florida,
w i t h h e r f i a n c e , who i s a U n i t e d S t a t e s A i r F o r c e r e t i r e e , a n d her
three
children:
11-year-old and
S.G., a 1 3 - y e a r - o l d
s o n -- b o t h
daughter;
D.G., an
from t h e mother's p r e v i o u s
marriage;
T.J.C. I I I ("the c h i l d " ) .
The m o t h e r was e m p l o y e d p a r t -
t i m e b y t h e l o c a l s c h o o l b o a r d as a s u b s t i t u t e t e a c h e r ' s
3
aide
2110700 and
clerical
Junior
worker;
she was
also
a
student
Pensacola
College.
The
mother had had pendente l i t e
custody of the c h i l d ,
who was t h e n a p p r o a c h i n g h i s s i x t h b i r t h d a y , half
at
years.
The
father
weekend v i s i t a t i o n w i t h custody
proceedings.
Crestview, The
Florida,
evidence
had been
exercising
the c h i l d during The
parties
w e l l - m a n n e r e d , a n d shy.
twice-monthly
been
meeting
the c h i l d
i s good-natured,
He h a s h i s own room when he v i s i t s a t
g r a n d p a r e n t s ' h o u s e , b u t he i s somewhat
and
to sleep
separate bed.
i n the father's
has v i s i t a t i o n
child's breakfast the
with
room, where he h a s a
the c h i l d ,
On t h e weekends when
the father
s m a l l M e t h o d i s t c h u r c h where t h e f a t h e r ' s
the father
care
f a m i l y members
The p a t e r n a l g r a n d m o t h e r s t a t e d t h a t ,
were a w a r d e d c u s t o d y
f o r the c h i l d
prepares the
and l u n c h , p l a y s w i t h him, and t a k e s him t o
have l o n g b e e n a c t i v e . if
fearful
The c h i l d h a s one p l a y m a t e n e a r h i s own age i n
the p a t e r n a l g r a n d p a r e n t s ' neighborhood. he
in
exchanges.
the p a t e r n a l prefers
and a
t h e pendency o f t h e
had
f o r the v i s i t a t i o n
indicated that
f o r three
of the c h i l d ,
she w o u l d
a t t i m e s when t h e f a t h e r i s a t work.
4
2110700 In
addition
to her parents,
t h e mother
has
a
large
e x t e n d e d f a m i l y i n M i l t o n , i n c l u d i n g c o u s i n s n e a r t h e same age as
the c h i l d .
The m o t h e r ' s
parents, are r e t i r e d . place
where
parents,
The m a t e r n a l
like
grandparents'
a l l the neighborhood
children,
c h i l d ' s two b e s t f r i e n d s , c o n g r e g a t e t o p l a y . that, although
the father's yard i s the
i n c l u d i n g the The m o t h e r
said
she h a d o f f e r e d t o d r i v e t h e c h i l d t o s c h o o l ,
t h e c h i l d p r e f e r s t o r i s e e a r l y a n d f i x h i s own b r e a k f a s t so t h a t he c a n r i d e t h e s c h o o l b u s w i t h h i s n e i g h b o r h o o d f r i e n d s and h i s h a l f b r o t h e r .
The c h i l d s h a r e s
a room w i t h t h e h a l f
b r o t h e r a n d , a c c o r d i n g t o t h e m o t h e r , t h e two a r e v e r y despite said
the five-year d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e i r
t h a t when t h e c h i l d ' s
half
siblings
ages.
close
The m o t h e r
had v i s i t e d
their
f a t h e r i n T e x a s t h e c h i l d h a d m i s s e d them a g r e a t d e a l . The c h i l d e n j o y s soccer league
s o c c e r and has p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a
f o r t h e p a s t two y e a r s .
church
The m o t h e r a t t e n d s some
b u t n o t a l l t h e c h i l d ' s s o c c e r games b e c a u s e she c o a c h e s h e r d a u g h t e r ' s s o c c e r team.
The m o t h e r i s v i c e p r e s i d e n t o f t h e
middle-school parent/teacher leader.
According
o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d h a s been a S c o u t
t o the c h i l d ' s
kindergarten
teacher, the
m o t h e r v o l u n t e e r s on a r e g u l a r b a s i s a t t h e c h i l d ' s
5
elementary
2110700 school
and
i s always w i l l i n g
kindergarten where
she
demanding
teacher had
had
current
term.
23
curriculum
than
the
favorably is
on
raised. had
she
She
personal
teacher
said,
opinion
in have
schools
stated
a
in
that
the
that
more
Alabama,
t o c a t c h up
that
the
The
Florida,
s t a t e d t h a t the
child
after of
child
he the
speaks
t h e m o t h e r ' s f i a n c e , and i t child
i s "very
Over t h e m o t h e r ' s o b j e c t i o n , t h e t e a c h e r her
schools years,
struggled
o f b o t h h i s f a t h e r and
evident,
activities.
s e v e r a l Mondays a t t h e b e g i n n i n g
The
2
the
for
a v e r a g e s t u d e n t who
missed school
with
teaching
where she had b e e n b o r n and i s an
help
t e s t i f i e d that
been
academic
to
"a c h i l d
was
should
be
much
allowed
loved." to
state
b r o u g h t up
in a
church environment." On was
cross-examination
a s k e d how
she)
could
her
retire
fiance
by t h e
father's counsel,
(whom she
from the
s t a t e d was
military
at
the
the
mother
t h e same age age
of
35.
as The
I n 2009, b e f o r e t h e c h i l d was o f s c h o o l age, t h e f a t h e r ' s weekend v i s i t a t i o n t i m e e x t e n d e d f r o m F r i d a y a t 3:15 p.m. to Monday a t 5:00 p.m. The e v i d e n c e i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e f a t h e r had f a i l e d t o r e t u r n t h e c h i l d i n t i m e f o r him t o b e g i n kindergarten on Monday, A u g u s t 24, 2009, and f o r s e v e r a l Mondays a f t e r t h a t . The m o t h e r f i l e d an e m e r g e n c y m o t i o n t o m o d i f y t h e v i s i t a t i o n s c h e d u l e , and t h e p a r t i e s s u b s e q u e n t l y a g r e e d t h a t t h e f a t h e r ' s weekend v i s i t a t i o n t i m e w o u l d end on Sunday e v e n i n g s r a t h e r t h a n on Monday a f t e r n o o n s . 2
6
2110700 mother
responded
terminal
that
Parkinson's
retirement.
Opposing
her fiance disease
had been
and
had
diagnosed
received
a
with
medical
c o u n s e l t h e n q u e s t i o n e d t h e m o t h e r as t o
w h e t h e r she t h o u g h t she was " s e n d i n g t h e wrong s i g n a l t o [ h e r ] c h i l d r e n w i t h [her f i a n c e ] l i v i n g i n [the] h o u s e h o l d and b e i n g i n t h e bed w i t h [her] a t n i g h t . "
The m o t h e r was a l s o a s k e d on
c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n whether the c h i l d was w i t h h e r .
a t t e n d e d c h u r c h when he
The m o t h e r s t a t e d t h a t she c o n s i d e r e d h e r s e l f
a C h r i s t i a n b u t t h a t she h a d n o t t a k e n t h e c h i l d t o c h u r c h f o r " a b o u t a y e a r " b e c a u s e she h a d n o t f o u n d a c h u r c h i n w h i c h she was c o m f o r t a b l e . The
mother's
fiance
testified
that
the
maternal
g r a n d p a r e n t s h a d a l l o w e d h i m t o move i n t o t h e i r home i n June or
J u l y o f 2009 a f t e r he a n d h i s f o r m e r w i f e h a d d i v o r c e d . A t
t h a t t i m e , he s a i d , he a n d t h e m o t h e r were f r i e n d s a n d he h a d slept
on t h e c o u c h .
S i x months l a t e r ,
he s a i d ,
he a n d t h e
mother d e v e l o p e d a r o m a n t i c and s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p , and t h e y c u r r e n t l y had p l a n s t o marry. the c h i l d The
The f i a n c e s t a t e d t h a t he l o v e d
"as i f [ t h e c h i l d ] were trial
[ h i s ] own."
c o u r t ' s c u s t o d y award
states:
"The c a r e , c u s t o d y a n d c o n t r o l o f s a i d c h i l d s h o u l d be, and i t hereby i s , awarded unto [ t h e 7
2110700 f a t h e r ] , t o be e x e r c i s e d i n t h e home o f h i s ppaarreennt s , w h e r e v e r t h e y may e l e c t to reside. S c a n l a n v. R o w i n s k y , 611 So. 2d 1092 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1992). "The C o u r t h a s , o f c o u r s e , c o n s i d e r e d an a w a r d of joint custody as r e q u i r e d by Ala. Code § 30-3-152, b u t i t t h e r e u p o n awards t h e f o r m o f c u s t o d y d e t e r m i n e d t o be i n t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s o f the p a r t i e s ' c h i l d , which i s always the c o u r t ' s primary concern. " O b v i o u s l y , t h e above a w a r d o f c u s t o d y does r e p r e s e n t an a l t e r a t i o n o f t h e t e m p o r a r y c u s t o d i a l s t a t u s h e r e t o f o r e e x i s t i n g . However, t h e b e n e f i t s t h e r e o f u n t o t h e c h i l d o u t w e i g h any d i s r u p t i o n i n his life caused by the alteration, and such a l t e r a t i o n w i l l l i k e w i s e m a t e r i a l l y promote h i s b e s t interests. " M o r e o v e r , t h e r e have b e e n m a t e r i a l c h a n g e s i n the circumstances of the p a r t i e s s i n c e the temporary c u s t o d y o r d e r s ( s u p e r s e d e d h e r e b y ) came i n t o e f f e c t , and t h o s e c h a n g e s a r e s u f f i c i e n t t o j u s t i f y t h e C o u r t i n p r o c e e d i n g as i t does i n t h i s d e c r e e . " Standard of Review The m o t h e r s u g g e s t s t h a t a d e f e r e n t i a l s t a n d a r d o f r e v i e w is
inappropriate in
elapsed
between
the
this
custody
c u s t o d y o r d e r o f J u l y 30, the
trial
listened indication
court to
tape
case
hearing
2010,
" c o u l d not recordings
because
the
the
months court's
t i m e , she
testimony There
c o u r t was
The J u l y 30, 2010, 8
six
trial
trial."
i n the r e c o r d t h a t the t r i a l
remember t h e t r i a l t e s t i m o n y .
the
d u r i n g which
remember of
and
almost
says,
...
and
is
no
unable
to
order merely
2110700 states: issues,
"The c o u r t , i n o r d e r has
again
p r e s e n t e d on F e b r u a r y c o u r t r e p o r t e r ' s tape
listened
t o g a i n a g r e a t e r grasp to
the entire
of the
testimony
as
9, 2010, h a v i n g done s o b y r e s o r t t o t h e recordings thereof."
We c o n c l u d e
that
o u r s t a n d a r d o f r e v i e w i s as s t a t e d i n Ex p a r t e Fann, 810 So. 2d 6 3 1 , 633 ( A l a . 2 0 0 1 ) : "When [an a p p e l l a t e c o u r t ] r e v i e w s a t r i a l c o u r t ' s c h i l d - c u s t o d y d e t e r m i n a t i o n t h a t was b a s e d upon e v i d e n c e p r e s e n t e d o r e t e n u s , we presume t h e t r i a l court's decision is correct: '"A custody d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f t h e t r i a l c o u r t e n t e r e d upon o r a l testimony i s accorded a presumption of c o r r e c t n e s s on a p p e a l , a n d we w i l l not reverse unless the e v i d e n c e so f a i l s t o s u p p o r t t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n t h a t i t i s p l a i n l y a n d p a l p a b l y wrong Ex p a r t e P e r k i n s , 646 So. 2d 46, 47 ( A l a . 1 9 9 4 ) , q u o t i n g P h i l l i p s v. P h i l l i p s , 622 So. 2d 410, 412 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1993) ( c i t a t i o n s o m i t t e d ) . T h i s p r e s u m p t i o n i s b a s e d on t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s unique p o s i t i o n t o d i r e c t l y observe t h e w i t n e s s e s and t o assess t h e i r demeanor and c r e d i b i l i t y . This opportunity to observe witnesses i s especially important in child-custody cases. 'In c h i l d custody cases e s p e c i a l l y , t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f an a t t e n t i v e trial judge i s of great importance.' W i l l i a m s v. W i l l i a m s , 402 So. 2d 1029, 1032 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1981). I n r e g a r d t o custody d e t e r m i n a t i o n s , t h i s Court has a l s o s t a t e d : ' I t i s a l s o w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t i n t h e absence o f s p e c i f i c f i n d i n g s o f f a c t , a p p e l l a t e c o u r t s w i l l assume t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t made t h o s e f i n d i n g s necessary t o support i t s j u d g m e n t , u n l e s s s u c h f i n d i n g s w o u l d be c l e a r l y erroneous.' Ex p a r t e B r y o w s k y , 676 So. 2d 1322, 1324 ( A l a . 1 9 9 6 ) . "
9
2110700 Discussion The
m o t h e r r a i s e s s e v e r a l a r g u m e n t s on a p p e a l t h a t can
d i s t i l l e d i n t o f o u r i s s u e s , n a m e l y : (I) w h e t h e r t h e f a t h e r required
t o meet t h e
455
So.
2d 863
the
child;
standard
set
(Ala. 1984), i n order
(II) whether the
adverse to the
to
i t perceived
(III)
that
whether the t r i a l
requires
the
court
father to exercise
was
McLendon,
erroneously
of
ignored
gave undue w e i g h t
adverse
to
the
mother;
judgment i s f l a w e d because i t his
custodial rights
home o f t h e p a t e r n a l g r a n d p a r e n t s ; and court's
parte
awarded c u s t o d y
f a t h e r and t o be
court's
i n Ex
t o be
trial
e v i d e n c e t h a t was evidence
out
be
in
(IV) w h e t h e r t h e
the
trial
judgment w i t h s t a n d s s c r u t i n y under a " b e s t - i n t e r e s t s "
standard.
We
will
address those issues
in turn.
I. Citing
Rich
v.
Rich,
887
So.
2d
289
2004), the mother contends t h a t , d e s p i t e September
11,
2007,
custody, the t r i a l considered the
awarding
court evidently
t h e a w a r d t o be one
McLendon s t a n d a r d
t h a t the
order
(and,
(Ala.
the
her she
Civ.
App.
language of "pendente says,
the
lite"
correctly)
of "temporary" custody to which
applied.
The
mother f u r t h e r
f a t h e r d i d n o t meet t h e McLendon
10
standard.
contends
2110700 Rich in
i s distinguishable.
that
case
were
awards
The s u c c e s s i v e of
"temporary"
custody custody
"permanent c u s t o d y s u b j e c t t o c h a n g e , " Ex p a r t e 2d
276, 278 ( A l a . 1994) —
awards —
J.P.,
or
641 So.
b e c a u s e t h e y "were n o t made
the
'pendency o f t h e [ e x i s t i n g ] l i t i g a t i o n '
887
So. 2d a t 300 ( q u o t i n g J.P.,
i n mind."
with Rich,
641 So. 2d a t 2 7 8 ) .
" I n s t e a d , e a c h o f t h o s e j u d g m e n t s was a c u s t o d y a w a r d made b y t h e t r i a l c o u r t i n s u c h a manner as t o a l l o w more f a c t s t o be d e v e l o p e d — i . e . , t o a l l o w a t r i a l p e r i o d w i t h t h e c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t a n d t o make i t p o s s i b l e t o b a s e a n y s u b s e q u e n t change i n c u s t o d y on t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e p a r t i e s ' r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t developed during that period." R i c h , 887 So. 2d a t 300. I n c o n t r a s t , t h e S e p t e m b e r 1 1 , 2007, order
i n the present
because
i t was
litigation
c a s e was a p e n d e n t e l i t e
made
i n mind
with —
t h e pendency
litigation
that
of
custody the
awaited
award
existing only
the
r e s o l u t i o n o f c r i m i n a l charges a g a i n s t t h e f a t h e r and n o t t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f new f a c t s r e g a r d i n g t h e p a r t i e s ' r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The
mother argues t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s s t a t e m e n t i n i t s
S e p t e m b e r 1 1 , 2007, o r d e r and
that the court would s e t a hearing
r e n d e r a c u s t o d y j u d g m e n t "upon w r i t t e n m o t i o n o f e i t h e r
party"
a c t u a l l y makes
the pendente
lite
custody
award
a
" ' p r i o r j u d i c i a l d e c r e e ' f o r p u r p o s e s o f McLendon," R i c h , 887
11
2110700 So.
2d a t 300,
because,
she s a y s , t h e t r i a l
court's
language
s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e S e p t e m b e r 11, 2007, c u s t o d y a w a r d was unless
either
modification.
p a r t y was We
successful
disagree.
The
in petitioning
September
11,
final
for i t s
2007,
order
states: "[T]he Court r e s e r v e s j u r i s d i c t i o n to h o l d a f u r t h e r h e a r i n g or h e a r i n g s w i t h r e s p e c t to the matters s e t o u t b e l o w , and t o t h e n r e n d e r t h e u l t i m a t e j u d g m e n t t h e r e o n as t h e e v i d e n c e may w a r r a n t . I t w i l l go f o r w a r d and do so upon w r i t t e n m o t i o n o f e i t h e r party." The
trial
c o u r t ' s statement
that
i t would
set a hearing
" r e n d e r t h e u l t i m a t e j u d g m e n t ... as t h e e v i d e n c e may i n d i c a t e s t h a t the t r i a l
and
warrant"
c o u r t r e c o g n i z e d t h a t i t had not y e t
e n t e r e d a f i n a l c u s t o d y a w a r d and t h a t a h e a r i n g on t h e m a t t e r would
be
set
upon
notification
by
f a t h e r ' s c r i m i n a l charges had been The governed time.
mother n e x t by She
that
party
that
p o i n t s out
that
in effect
t h i r d s of the c h i l d ' s "[P]endente l i t e Sims v. Sims,
the
the
resolved.
the p r e s e n t case
should
t h e McLendon s t a n d a r d b e c a u s e o f t h e p a s s a g e
award remained
rule."
argues
either
September
11,
2007,
f o r t h r e e and a h a l f y e a r s —
be of
custody two-
life. o r d e r s ... do n o t a c t i v a t e t h e McLendon 515
So.
2d 1, 3 12
( A l a . C i v . App.
1987).
2110700 " I f t h e r e has been a g r a n t o f p r i m a r y p h y s i c a l c u s t o d y t o one p a r t y , t h e n McLendon a p p l i e s ; i f n o t , the 'best i n t e r e s t ' standard a p p l i e s . Ex p a r t e C o u c h , 521 So. 2d 987 ( A l a . 1988) . The [September 11, 2007,] o r d e r d i d n o t a c t i v a t e t h e McLendon r u l e , b e c a u s e i t was a p e n d e n t e l i t e o r d e r . '[A] p e n d e n t e l i t e o r d e r , whether e n t e r e d ex p a r t e o r a f t e r n o t i c e and hearing, clearly envisions a temporary disposition of custody pending a later final determination of the custody d i s p u t e . ' Sims v. S i m s , 515 So. 2d 1, 2 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1987) . The [September 1 1 , 2007,] o r d e r i n d i c a t e s that the [mother] was g r a n t e d c u s t o d y p e n d i n g t r i a l , a f t e r w h i c h t h e c o u r t w o u l d make a f i n a l determination regarding custody. ' I t i s well settled that a p e n d e n t e l i t e o r d e r c h a n g i n g c u s t o d y does n o t s h i f t t h e b u r d e n o f m e e t i n g t h e McLendon s t a n d a r d t o t h e p a r e n t who t e m p o r a r i l y l o s e s c u s t o d y b y v i r t u e o f t h a t o r d e r . See T.L.L. v. T.F.L., J r . , 580 So. 2d 1359 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 9 1 ) ; Sims v. S i m s , 515 So.2d 1 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 8 7 ) . ' D.P.M. v. D.B., 669 So. 2d 1 9 1 , 194 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 9 5 ) . " C.M.L. v . L.S.M., 680 So. 2d 375, 377 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 9 6 ) . T h i s c o u r t h a s p r e v i o u s l y r e j e c t e d t h e argument t h a t t h e passage o f time between t h e e n t r y o f a pendente l i t e
custody
order
to the
and t h e f i n a l
noncustodial standard. App.
parent
custody
award
the burden
See G r a n t v . G r a n t ,
somehow
of
meeting
820 So. 2d
shifts the
McLendon
824, 825 ( A l a . C i v .
2001). To t h e e x t e n t t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t p u r p o r t e d t o a p p l y t h e
McLendon
standard,
harmless,
because,
i t erred. as we
discuss 13
Such
error
infra,
was,
the t r i a l
however, court's
2110700 j u d g m e n t i s due
t o be
a f f i r m e d under the l e s s s t r i n g e n t
i n t e r e s t s standard. (Ala.
C i v . App.
McLendon
See
2004)
standard
Rehfeld
v. R o t h , 885
( s t a t i n g t h a t any
to
a
So.
2d 791,
795
error i n applying
the
custody-modification
harmless e r r o r because the
trial
court's
petition
that
standard); 1995)
the I.M.
(noting
standard
...
petitioner
v. J . P . F . , 668 that
"the
rather McLendon
than
had
met
So.
2d 843,
trial the
because
the
court's
e r r o r i n that regard
the
court 'best
standard
that
necessarily
best-interests
845
(Ala. Civ.
applied
the
App.
McLendon
i n t e r e s t ' standard,
i s more s t r i n g e n t , is
was
determination
t h e p e t i t i o n e r had s a t i s f i e d t h e McLendon s t a n d a r d meant
best-
the
but trial
harmless").
II. The
mother argues t h a t the
indicating pay
with
court
ignored
(a) t h a t t h e f a t h e r had v i o l a t e d p r e v i o u s
pendente
personal
trial
lite
property
a petition
child
to her;
support
and
to
evidence orders
deliver
(b) t h a t t h e f a t h e r had t o be
to modify the
visitation
certain served
schedule before
agreed to r e t u r n the c h i l d to the mother's c u s t o d y i n time begin kindergarten several
on Monday m o r n i n g , A u g u s t 24,
Mondays a f t e r t h a t ;
and
14
(c)
that
2009, and
i t was
not
to
in
he to for the
2110700 best
interests
siblings. accorded
The
the
court
trial a
to her
trial
child
mother to
dismissed
child-support
76.
The
arrearage court's Nor the
his
trial
half court
fiance i n
the
attendance.
ignore evidence pendente
indicating
lite
was
arrearage
the
See
failed
property
to
beginning
of the t r i a l
failed
to
as
to
r e n d i t i o n and 11,
the
mother.
certain
father
i n February
2010
that
items
property
mother.
The
t r i a l c o u r t c o u l d have c o n c l u d e d
15
trial
day
to
that
personal at
the
neglected
s t a t e d t h a t he
the
complains
of
t h a t he had
brought
a b o u t w h i c h t h e m o t h e r now
him
the
indicating
acknowledged
t o t r a n s f e r t h e p r o p e r t y t o t h e m o t h e r and with
of
3d
2012.
deliver The
amount
e n t r y of the
court ignore evidence to
determine
D.M.P.C.P. v. T.J.C., 91 So.
agreement
j u d g m e n t on A p r i l d i d the t r i a l
had
appeal
support.
i n f a c t , expressly determined that there but
first
child
that
the
r e s u l t e d i n the
the
the
of her
church
mother's
from
because
parties'
f a t h e r had
him
that
presence
pay
the
amount o f t h e a r r e a r a g e . at
the
to
separate
argues
irregular
failed
c o u r t had,
to
also
c o u r t d i d not
f a t h e r had
This
the
undue w e i g h t
h o u s e h o l d and The
of
deliver that both
to
had the
issues
had b e e n r e s o l v e d t o
the
2110700 mother's
satisfaction
predominately
and
should
not
i n the court's child-custody
have
figured
determination.
The m o t h e r a r g u e s t h a t t h e f a t h e r o f f e r e d a "lame e x c u s e " for
failing
to return the c h i l d
that the c h i l d
could attend kindergarten
the
2009-2010 s c h o o l t e r m .
not
known when t h e s c h o o l
when
he
had
from v i s i t a t i o n
learned
he
had
year
that
agreed
so
at the beginning
of
The f a t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t he h a d started i n Florida
the c h i l d
Mondays when t h e f a t h e r h a d b e e n rights,
periods
had missed
and t h a t , school
on
exercising his visitation
t o modify
the v i s i t a t i o n
schedule
b e c a u s e t o do o t h e r w i s e w o u l d , he s a i d , "mess up [ t h e c h i l d ' s ] academics."
The t r i a l
a first-time
parent
the
mother
concerning "[I]t
had
i s the province
to give the father,
of a school-age c h i l d
not
the c h i l d ,
c o u r t was e n t i t l e d
regularly
a n d one w i t h whom
communicated
issues
t h e b e n e f i t o f t h e d o u b t on t h i s i s s u e . of the t r i a l
court, not of t h i s
... t o make c r e d i b i l i t y d e t e r m i n a t i o n s . " So.
about
court,
Sims v. S i m s , 85
3d 407, 412 ( A l a . C i v . App. 2 0 1 1 ) . The
mother's
child
from
facts
that
arguments
his half she
was
with
siblings
respect
to separating the
and w e i g h i n g
cohabiting
16
with
her
against
her the
fiance
and n o t
2110700 regularly
attending
church
present
more s e r i o u s i s s u e s ,
they are i s s u e s f o r which the t r i a l to
weigh the evidence
as i t saw
c o u r t had
but
the p r e r o g a t i v e
f i t w i t h i n the l i m i t s
of i t s
discretion. "A d e t e r m i n a t i o n as t o t h e w e i g h t t o be given testimony presented to a t r i a l court while that c o u r t i s s i t t i n g as a t r i e r o f f a c t i s f u l l y w i t h i n t h e d i s c r e t i o n o f t h e c o u r t s i n c e one o f t h e p r i m a r y f u n c t i o n s of a t r i e r of f a c t i s to weigh the evidence before i t and reach i t s conclusions a c c o r d i n g to the weight g i v e n to each p o r t i o n of evidence presented." Stewart
v.
1977).
Stewart,
It
354
i s within
So. the
2d
816,
province
821-22
(Ala. Civ.
of
trial
the
" ' a s s i g n such weight to v a r i o u s aspects reasonably Prop.
may
have
Owners' A s s ' n v.
App.
2011)
So.
2d 982,
the
trial
evidence, In
Moon, 86
(quoting M i l l e r 990
...
Ex
... ,
w h i c h we
parte
3d
Vestlake
359,
367
... are
Devine,
2005)).
we
would
Cmtys.
(Ala. Civ.
"'In order to have
to
398
So.
2d
686
(Ala.
941
reverse
reweigh
[ n o t ] a l l o w e d t o do.'"
to
as i t
v. A s s o c i a t e d G u l f L a n d C o r p . ,
( A l a . C i v . App.
court
So.
court
of the evidence
deemed a p p r o p r i a t e . ' "
App.
the
Id. 1981),
our
supreme c o u r t h e l d t h a t , i n d e t e r m i n i n g t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s
and
welfare
the
of
individual
a
child,
the
f a c t s of each
trial
case: 17
court
must
consider
2110700 " [ T ] h e c o u r t must ... c o n s i d e r t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and needs o f e a c h c h i l d , i n c l u d i n g t h e i r e m o t i o n a l , s o c i a l , m o r a l , m a t e r i a l and e d u c a t i o n a l needs; t h e r e s p e c t i v e home e n v i r o n m e n t s o f f e r e d b y t h e p a r t i e s ; the characteristics of those seeking custody, including age, c h a r a c t e r , stability, m e n t a l and p h y s i c a l h e a l t h ; t h e c a p a c i t y and i n t e r e s t o f each parent t o provide f o r the emotional, s o c i a l , moral, m a t e r i a l a n d e d u c a t i o n a l needs o f t h e c h i l d r e n ; t h e interpersonal r e l a t i o n s h i p between each c h i l d and each p a r e n t ; t h e i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e c h i l d r e n ; t h e e f f e c t on t h e c h i l d o f d i s r u p t i n g o r c o n t i n u i n g an e x i s t i n g c u s t o d i a l status; the p r e f e r e n c e o f each c h i l d , i f the c h i l d i s of sufficient age a n d m a t u r i t y ; the report and recommendation o f any e x p e r t w i t n e s s e s o r o t h e r independent i n v e s t i g a t o r ; available alternatives; and any o t h e r r e l e v a n t m a t t e r t h e e v i d e n c e may disclose." 398
So. 2d a t 696-97.
B a s e d on D e v i n e , t h e t r i a l
authorized to consider, needs" o f t h e c h i l d , by
the p a r t i e s , "
among o t h e r
factors,
the "moral
"the respective
home e n v i r o n m e n t s
and " t h e c a p a c i t y
... o f e a c h
p r o v i d e f o r t h e ... m o r a l needs o f t h e c h i l d [ ] . " The
mother c i t e s a u t h o r i t y
that
a parent's
that
triggers
c o u r t was ...
offered
parent to Id.
standing f o rthe proposition
s e x u a l m i s c o n d u c t may n o t s e r v e a s a
factor
a change i n c u s t o d y when t h e r e c o r d l a c k s a n y
e v i d e n c e i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e misconduct has had a d e t r i m e n t a l e f f e c t on t h e c h i l d . Clark,
The c a s e s c i t e d b y t h e m o t h e r —
564 So. 2d 982
(Ala.
C i v . App. 1 9 9 0 ) ,
18
Wade v.
and Smith v.
2110700 S m i t h , 464 seeking
So.
2d 97
( A l a . C i v . App.
t o m o d i f y an i n i t i a l
1984)
be
considered
award u n l e s s effect
on
the
child.
factor
sexual
character,
without
detrimental
to the
conduct a
that
See
2002)
t h a t w i f e had
before
she
separated
2d 963
( A l a . C i v . App. consider,
t h a t t h e w i f e had
a
the
to
may
custody
detrimental
parent's
conduct
has
H e a d r i c k v. H e a d r i c k ,
(holding that evidence
the
consider
that
been
845
So.
supported
c h i l d t o husband, d e s p i t e
been c h i l d ' s p r i m a r y c a r e t a k e r ,
c o m m i t t e d a d u l t e r y and
could
initial
caselaw suggests that
i t relates
showing
child.
( A l a . C i v . App.
as
c u s t o d y award of t h r e e - y e a r - o l d fact
sexual misconduct
i n m a k i n g an
In f a c t , our
actions
mother c i t e s
i n an i n i t i a l c u s t o d y d e t e r m i n a t i o n ,
parent's
2d 823
a
The
t h a t c o n d u c t i s shown t o have had
t r i a l c o u r t may, a
as
concern
c u s t o d y award.
no a u t h o r i t y i n d i c a t i n g t h a t a p a r e n t ' s not
—
the
when w i f e
became p r e g n a n t w i t h p a r a m o u r ' s c h i l d
f r o m h u s b a n d ) ; Graham v. Graham, 640 1994)
( i n d i c a t i n g t h a t the t r i a l
i n m a k i n g an
initial
custody
So. court
determination,
committed a d u l t e r y d u r i n g the course of
marriage);
and B a t e s v. B a t e s ,
App.1996)
(stating
that
a
678
trial
19
So.2d 1160, court
may
1162
the
(Ala. Civ.
consider,
among
2110700 other
things,
a parent's
c h a r a c t e r when
deciding issue of
custody). III. The flawed
mother m a i n t a i n s t h a t t h e t r i a l because
i t requires
c o u r t ' s judgment i s
the father
to
exercise h i s
c u s t o d i a l r i g h t s i n t h e home o f t h e p a t e r n a l g r a n d p a r e n t s , who were n o n p a r t i e s t o t h e d i v o r c e a c t i o n . portion
o f i t s judgment,
Rowinsky, which
court
cited
conditioned
trial
judge
awarded
on h i s e x e r c i s i n g
grandmother.
distinguishable
custody
The m o t h e r
because
both
custody
of that
Scanlan
611 So. 2d 1092 ( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 9 2 ) ,
t h e same
paternal
the t r i a l
In support
a case i n
to a
father,
i n t h e home
contends
v.
of the
that Scanlan i s
sets of grandparents
had been
made p a r t i e s t o t h e d i v o r c e a c t i o n i n t h a t c a s e , w h e r e a s t h e paternal
grandparents
proceeding i n t h i s
were n o t made p a r t i e s
case.
to the divorce
A c c o r d i n g l y , she a r g u e s ,
court's
judgment
i n the present
custody
award t o a n o n p a r t y
case
the t r i a l
r e p r e s e n t s a de
that violated
her r i g h t
facto t o due
process of law. N e i t h e r Scanlan n o r t h e p r e s e n t case r e p r e s e n t s a custody award t o a g r a n d p a r e n t .
I n each
20
case,
the father
a l o n e was
2110700 awarded
custody.
The
party
Scanlan
is a distinction
status
without
of
the
grandmother
a difference.
That
because n e i t h e r the c u s t o d y award i n S c a n l a n nor the award i n t h i s case o r d e r e d a g r a n d p a r e n t doing anything. on
the
father's
position
The
carries
conditional
with
award
upon e v i d e n c e
work and
custody
t o do o r r e f r a i n
position
it."
611
i n the p r e s e n t
indicating
and So. case
t h a t the
4:30-5:00 p.m.
2d
at
was
based
1094.
The
apparently
f a t h e r was
when he
from
the u n c e r t a i n t y such
c a r e f o r t h e c h i l d b e t w e e n t h e h o u r s o f 5:00 for
i s so
c o n d i t i o n a l a w a r d i n S c a n l a n was
"military
in
based
unavailable to
a.m.
when he
left
r e t u r n e d f r o m work.
IV. The m o t h e r c o n t e n d s
t h a t the c u s t o d y award t o the
c a n n o t be u p h e l d e v e n u n d e r a b e s t - i n t e r e s t s s t a n d a r d . she
says, the t r i a l
awarding
alternative unable Ala.
basis
to
joint
custody.
discount
because the p a r t i e s
t o communicate w i t h each Code
1975,
First,
c o u r t e r r o n e o u s l y r e j e c t e d the o p t i o n of
the p a r t i e s
evidentiary
father
and
their
The
joint had
custody
c o u r t had as
a past h i s t o r y
o t h e r , see §
residences
21
trial
were
a of
an
viable being
30-3-152(a)(2), not
in
close
2110700 g e o g r a p h i c p r o x i m i t y t o each o t h e r , see § 30-3-152(a)(5),
Ala.
Code 1975. " B e c a u s e t h i s was an i n i t i a l c u s t o d y
determination,
where
t h e p a r t i e s a r e on e q u a l f o o t i n g a n d t h e t r i a l c o u r t must b a s e its
decision
on what
i t determines
would
be
i n the best
i n t e r e s t of the c h i l d , our review i s very l i m i t e d . " 845
So. 2d a t 825 ( c i t a t i o n o m i t t e d ) .
makes no s p e c i f i c assume t h a t support
findings of fact,
the t r i a l
court
i t s judgment, u n l e s s
erroneous,
Ex p a r t e
Headrick,
When t h e t r i a l
court
an a p p e l l a t e c o u r t
must
made t h e f i n d i n g s n e c e s s a r y s u c h f i n d i n g s w o u l d be
Bryowsky,
clearly
676 So. 2d 1322, 1324
1996), and t h e a p p e l l a t e c o u r t w i l l
reverse the t r i a l
to
(Ala.
court's
j u d g m e n t o n l y i f i t i s f o u n d t o be p l a i n l y a n d p a l p a b l y wrong, Ex p a r t e P e r k i n s , 646 So. 2d 46, 47 ( A l a . 1994) . record before
B a s e d on t h e
u s , we c a n n o t c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e t r i a l
j u d g m e n t was p l a i n l y a n d p a l p a b l y wrong.
court's
"This court i s not
a t l i b e r t y t o s e t a s i d e t h e judgment o f t h e t r i a l c o u r t m e r e l y b e c a u s e we m i g h t have d e c i d e d d i f f e r e n t l y h a d we b e e n as t h e t r i a l
judge."
E t h r i d g e v. E t h r i d g e ,
1008
( A l a . C i v . App. 1 9 7 8 ) .
that
of the t r i a l
court
sitting
360 So. 2d 1005,
"'To s u b s t i t u t e o u r j u d g m e n t f o r
would
22
be t o r e w e i g h
the
evidence.
2110700 T h i s A l a b a m a l a w does n o t a l l o w . ' " (quoting App.
Perkins,
646 So. 2d a t 47
P h i l l i p s v. P h i l l i p s , 622 So. 2d 410, 412
(Ala. Civ.
1993)). The j u d g m e n t o f t h e C o v i n g t o n C i r c u i t
Court i s affirmed.
AFFIRMED. Thomas, J . , c o n c u r s . Bryan,
J . , concurs
i n the r e s u l t ,
Thompson, P . J . , and Moore, J . , j o i n .
23
with
writing,
which
2110700 BRYAN, J u d g e , My the
c o n c u r r i n g i n the
result.
review of the r e c o r d i n t h i s
best
interest
of
the
child
case
would
c o n v i n c e s me
have
been
that
served i f
D.M.P.C.P. h a d b e e n a l l o w e d t o r e t a i n p h y s i c a l c u s t o d y o f t h e child.
However, as an a p p e l l a t e - c o u r t j u d g e , my
w i t h the t r i a l for
...
court's decision
r e v e r s a l of the t r i a l
disagreement
"does n o t c o n s t i t u t e a b a s i s
c o u r t which heard the
evidence
and o b s e r v e d t h e w i t n e s s e s . " G r i m s l e y v. G r i m s l e y , 545 So. 75, 77
( A l a . C i v . App.
1989).
2d
B e c a u s e I am c o n s t r a i n e d by t h e
a p p l i c a b l e s t a n d a r d of review, I concur i n the Thompson, P . J . , and Moore, J . , c o n c u r .
24
result.
