Preview:

REL: 05/07/2010

Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o formal 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 , Alabama 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, 2009-2010

2090001

Kevin J . Knight v. Sarah J . Knight Appeal from Lauderdale C i r c u i t (DR-08-307.01) THOMPSON, P r e s i d i n g J u d g e . Kevin J . Knight ("the f a t h e r " ) a n d S a r a h J . K n i g h t ("the Court

m o t h e r " ) were d i v o r c e d b y an A u g u s t 29, 2008, j u d g m e n t o f t h e t r i a l court. The d i v o r c e j u d g m e n t i n c o r p o r a t e d an a g r e e m e n t Pursuant t o t h e d i v o r c e judgment, t h e

reached by the p a r t i e s .

2090001 p a r t i e s s h a r e d j o i n t l e g a l and p h y s i c a l c u s t o d y o f t h e i r child. On F e b r u a r y 1 9 , 2009, t h e m o t h e r f i l e d a p e t i t i o n to modify custody to of the child, with seeking to a minor

requesting permission child and seeking

relocate

California

the The

m o d i f i c a t i o n of c h i l d support. which he objected to the

f a t h e r f i l e d an answer i n relocation and asserted an

proposed

c o u n t e r c l a i m s s e e k i n g an a w a r d o f c u s t o d y o f t h e c h i l d and award of c h i l d The two days. trial On support. court conducted September 9, a h e a r i n g over trial the course

of a

2009, t h e

court entered

judgment i n which child the

i t awarded p r i m a r y p h y s i c a l c u s t o d y of

the with

t o the mother, a u t h o r i z e d the mother t o r e l o c a t e to C a l i f o r n i a , The and modified the father's

child

childmotion, timely

support o b l i g a t i o n . and the trial

father f i l e d

a postjudgment The father

court denied

t h a t motion.

appealed. The some t i m e The or record indicates before t h a t the p a r t i e s of t h e i r child moved t o A l a b a m a i n October 2006.

the b i r t h

parties' near

t e s t i m o n y e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t t h e y e a c h grew up i n Ynez, California, that they went to school

Santa

2

2090001 t h e r e , a n d t h a t t h e y moved f r o m t h e S a n t a Y n e z a r e a t o A l a b a m a i n order f o r t h e f a t h e r t o work w i t h h i s u n c l e i n constructing

houses i n Alabama. initial and plans

The f a t h e r ' s t e s t i m o n y i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e or f o r h i s uncle d i d n o t work o u t

t o work w i t h

t h a t , t h e r e a f t e r , t h e f a t h e r c r e a t e d h i s own c o n s t r u c t i o n The f a t h e r a n d h i s b u s i n e s s p a r t n e r to others. store until January 2009. c o n s t r u c t and

business.

r e m o d e l homes t o s e l l The mother

owned a c l o t h i n g

The m o t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t she t r a v e l e d t o C a l i f o r n i a

monthly took

t o p u r c h a s e m e r c h a n d i s e f o r h e r s t o r e a n d t h a t she o f t e n the child with h e r on those buying trips. The

mother

explained Santa

t h a t she had a g r e a t d e a l o f e x t e n d e d f a m i l y i n t h e area and t h a t t h e mother and t h e c h i l d trips. The custody judgment visited

Ynez

f a m i l y a n d f r i e n d s when t h e y went on b u y i n g The agreement provided parties divorced into i n August

2008.

incorporated

the p a r t i e s '

divorce

t h a t t h e m o t h e r have c u s t o d y o f t h e c h i l d f o r 7 o f 1 1

d a y s a n d f o r t h e f a t h e r t o have t h e c h i l d f o r t h e r e m a i n i n g 4 days o f t h e 11-day period. The m o t h e r explained that the

p a r t i e s a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t t h e f a t h e r w o u l d have t h e c h i l d f o r two consecutive four-day periods when she traveled to

3

2090001 California f o r her business. However, t h e mother testified a l l the

that, a f t e r the divorce, custodial periods occasion with

the father d i d not exercise

a v a i l a b l e t o h i m a n d t h a t , on a t l e a s t one she h a d t a k e n t h e c h i l d The mother

a f t e r the p a r t i e s ' divorce, when she traveled

her

to California.

s u b m i t t e d i n t o e v i d e n c e an e x h i b i t d o c u m e n t i n g t h e d a t e s on w h i c h s h e h a d h a d c u s t o d y o f t h e c h i l d , t h e d a t e s on w h i c h t h e father had had custody of the c h i l d , and c u s t o d i a l days

a v a i l a b l e t o t h e f a t h e r t h a t he h a d n o t e x e r c i s e d . testified seeking child, that, a f t e r she f i l e d her February 2009

The m o t h e r complaint with the

authorization

to relocate

to California

the father f u l l y exercised h i s c u s t o d i a l

time.

The f a t h e r d i s p u t e d custodial periods.

t h a t he h a d n o t f u l l y e x e r c i s e d h i s rescheduled

The f a t h e r s t a t e d t h a t he h a d

some o f t h e d a y s he was t o have t h e c h i l d b u t t h a t he b e l i e v e d he had not missed any o p p o r t u n i t y t o have custody of the

child. After t h e p a r t i e s moved t o A l a b a m a f r o m C a l i f o r n i a , t h e who h a d l i v e d i n t h e S a n t a Y n e z

mother's s i s t e r and p a r e n t s , area,

a l s o r e l o c a t e d t o A l a b a m a t o be c l o s e r t o t h e p a r t i e s .

The m o t h e r e x p l a i n e d t h a t h e r p a r e n t s a r e a t t e n d i n g c o l l e g e i n

4

2090001 Alabama i n o r d e r to obtain t h e i r teaching certificates. The

mother t e s t i f i e d t h a t h e r s i s t e r and the s i s t e r ' s spent a great Alabama but deal that

f a m i l y had and had

of time t r a v e l i n g between C a l i f o r n i a her sister and her sister's family

recently returned

to live

i n California.

The m o t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t she w a n t e d t o r e l o c a t e w i t h t h e c h i l d to C a l i f o r n i a f o r several reasons. The m o t h e r t e s t i f i e d

t h a t h e r b u s i n e s s h a d b e e n u n p r o f i t a b l e and t h a t she h a d s o l d the business. The m o t h e r stated that she h a d a t t e m p t e d t o her e f f o r t s had been

locate

employment

i n Alabama

but that

unsuccessful. mother and

At the time of the hearing were living

i n t h i s m a t t e r , the

the c h i l d

i n government-subsidized

housing. The m o t h e r t e s t i f i e d a job in California t h a t she h a d r e c e i v e d with a salary of an o f f e r f o r plus

$48,000,

c o m m i s s i o n s ; t h e mother s t a t e d t h a t

she b e l i e v e d

her annual to

income c o u l d be as much as $60,000 i n t h a t j o b .

According

t h e m o t h e r , t h e j o b o f f e r was a p o s i t i o n i n e v e n t s a l e s f o r a winery. the The m o t h e r e x p l a i n e d t h a t , i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e s a l a r y ,

j o b was a t t r a c t i v e b e c a u s e she w o u l d be r e q u i r e d t o w o r k two d a y s e a c h w e e k ; t h e m o t h e r

away f r o m h e r h o u s e f o r o n l y

5

2090001 s t a t e d t h a t she c o u l d w o r k f r o m home f o r t h e r e m a i n d e r o f t h e time, child. which would enable h e r t o s p e n d more she c o u l d time rent of a with the

The m o t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t

a home i n long-term

S a n t a Y n e z f o r $500 p e r month f r o m t h e p a r e n t s male friend. The preschool mother presented evidence regarding

a

Montessori

she p l a n n e d f o r t h e c h i l d t o a t t e n d on t h e d a y s she The m o t h e r s t a t e d t h a t , although

w o r k e d away f r o m h e r home.

she h a d b e e n s a t i s f i e d i n i t i a l l y w i t h t h e c h u r c h p r e s c h o o l t h e child nature has been of a attending, care." she b e l i e v e d The mother that i t was i n the she

"day

testified

that

b e l i e v e d t h e c h i l d n e e d e d more e d u c a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s , s u c h as t h o s e a v a i l a b l e a t t h e p r e s c h o o l i n C a l i f o r n i a . had also identified a local charter school The m o t h e r possible

as a

elementary school

f o r t h e c h i l d when he r e a c h e d s c h o o l age. the great number o f

The m o t h e r a l s o t e s t i f i e d r e g a r d i n g aunts, the uncles, cousins,

a n d f r i e n d s she a n d t h e c h i l d h a d i n The m o t h e r stated that the extendedwith

Santa Ynez area.

f a m i l y members c o u l d p r o v i d e the child.

support

i f she n e e d e d h e l p

6

2090001 The will mother a l s o t e s t i f i e d t h a t to facilitate, the she has facilitated, and the

continue the

r e l a t i o n s h i p between

c h i l d and

father.

I t i s u n d i s p u t e d t h a t the c h i l d w i t h t h e p a r e n t who

speaks

on t h e t e l e p h o n e d a i l y c u s t o d y o f him. The

does n o t t h e n have had proposed a the

m o t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t she

c u s t o d i a l arrangement to a l l o w the f a t h e r v i s i t a t i o n w i t h child i f she were allowed to relocate with the

child.

P u r s u a n t t o t h a t p r o p o s e d a g r e e m e n t , t h e m o t h e r w o u l d have t h e c h i l d for four consecutive child that f o r two consecutive weeks and t h e f a t h e r w o u l d have t h e weeks. The mother e x p l a i n e d father having only i s afforded divorce that six

arrangement would r e s u l t year w i t h the

i n the child

fewer days per the custody

t h a n he i n the

under

arrangement

specified

judgment. California exercise In

The m o t h e r a l s o s t a t e d t h a t t h e f a t h e r o f t e n v i s i t s to see friends and family the and that he could

additional v i s i t a t i o n with

c h i l d during

those times.

a d d i t i o n , t h e m o t h e r p r o p o s e d t h a t t h e f a t h e r use t h e t o have v i d e o - t e l e p h o n e c o n v e r s a t i o n s The flying parties presented evidence with the

Internet

child. the cost that of an

regarding and they was

from Alabama t o

California,

agreed two

a d u l t w o u l d have t o f l y w i t h t h e c h i l d , who

years o l d

7

2090001 at the time of the hearing, when he traveled t o and from The

California,

thereby i n c r e a s i n g the t r a n s p o r t a t i o n costs. the c h i l d enjoyed flying

mother s t a t e d t h a t

on an a i r p l a n e . took f i v e to s i x that four flight

The m o t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e t r i p n o r m a l l y hours, i n c l u d i n g time f o r a l a y o v e r . a direct flight from Alabama

The m o t h e r s t a t e d took only

to California

h o u r s , b u t she s t a t e d t h a t she h a d n e v e r t a k e n a d i r e c t with child during the c h i l d . w o u l d do a layover The m o t h e r e x p l a i n e d better i f he were that

she b e l i e v e d t h e the plane

able

to leave

for exercise

and a m e a l .

The f a t h e r c o n c e d e d t h a t t h e m o t h e r was a good m o t h e r and t h a t she h a s been t h e c h i l d ' s p r i m a r y c a r e t a k e r . testified t h a t he d i d n o t want t h e c h i l d The father from

t o be removed

Alabama; the father his

s t a t e d t h a t he i n t e n d e d

t o make A l a b a m a t o be r a i s e d

p e r m a n e n t home and t h a t he w a n t e d t h e c h i l d

i n Alabama. and

I n a d d i t i o n , the p a r t i e s agreed that the f a t h e r relationship. his

t h e c h i l d have a c l o s e

The f a t h e r s t a t e d t h a t , b e c a u s e he was s e l f - e m p l o y e d , s c h e d u l e was The flexible and he could meet t h e c h i l d ' s that

needs. had

father presented evidence

indicating

the c h i l d

been a t t e n d i n g a c h u r c h day c a r e o r p r e s c h o o l

w h i l e i n Alabama

8

2090001 and that the c h i l d age. school The could father continue t o do so u n t i l he r e a c h e d evidence concerning a

school private

presented

he w a n t e d t h e c h i l d

to attend

when t h e c h i l d

r e a c h e d s c h o o l age. The leave father also stated t h a t , when n e c e s s a r y , he could lived

t h e c h i l d i n t h e c a r e o f t h e f a t h e r ' s m o t h e r , who The f a t h e r admitted that t h e m o t h e r was

nearby.

concerned

a b o u t l e a v i n g t h e c h i l d w i t h t h e p a t e r n a l g r a n d m o t h e r , who h a s a f e l o n y drug c o n v i c t i o n . H o w e v e r , t h e f a t h e r s t a t e d t h a t he

w o u l d n o t l e a v e t h e c h i l d w i t h t h e p a t e r n a l g r a n d m o t h e r i f he had any c o n c e r n s a b o u t h e r a b i l i t y to properly care f o r the

child. the

The f a t h e r a l s o t e s t i f i e d t h a t t h e c h i l d was c l o s e t o brother. testified that the mother's the c h i l d i f

father's nine-year-old In addition, would be

the father willing

parents

to help

him w i t h

necessary.

The m o t h e r ' s f a t h e r

t e s t i f i e d , h o w e v e r , t h a t he

a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t he a n d t h e c h i l d ' s m a t e r n a l g r a n d m o t h e r w o u l d r e t u r n t o C a l i f o r n i a i f t h e m o t h e r was a l l o w e d explained California that t h e mother's sister t o r e l o c a t e ; he returned to

had already

a n d t h a t he a n d h i s w i f e w a n t e d t o be n e a r grandchildren.

their

c h i l d r e n and

9

2090001 The father testified that he believed that the mother

l i v e d an e x t r a v a g a n t l i f e s t y l e means. The mother alleged

t h a t was that

beyond her father

financial had been was The

the

c o n t r o l l i n g d u r i n g t h e i r m a r r i a g e and t h a t she b e l i e v e d he c o n t i n u i n g to attempt to c o n t r o l her a f t e r t h e i r d i v o r c e . father disputed t h a t the mother c o u l d not had

f i n d employment i n t r u l y attempted to of

A l a b a m a , and he q u e s t i o n e d w h e t h e r she do so. The

f a t h e r p r e s e n t e d e v i d e n c e i n d i c a t i n g t h a t one

t h e m o t h e r ' s f o r m e r e m p l o y e r s had with The salaries i n the range of

job openings f o r p o s i t i o n s to $40, 000 per year. had his

$25, 000

o p e r a t o r of t h a t b u s i n e s s acknowledged t h a t the mother $22,000 p e r he y e a r when she was employed w i t h

earned only b u s i n e s s , and $40,000 p e r The

s t a t e d t h a t he was job. indicated that he

not o f f e r i n g the mother a

year

father

had the the

t r a v e l e d to

the

Santa We

Ynez a r e a t w i c e i n the n o t e t h a t , on one

year since

p a r t i e s ' divorce. f a t h e r was

of those t r i p s , that, during

accompanied and that in

by h i s g i r l f r i e n d and the

that t r i p , The

the mother

c h i l d were a l s o i n C a l i f o r n i a .

f a t h e r conceded

he d i d n o t a t t e m p t t o see t h e c h i l d i n t h e f i v e d a y s he was C a l i f o r n i a during that t r i p .

Rather, the f a t h e r a d m i t t e d t h a t

10

2090001 he the s p e n t much o f t h a t t i m e home of and the man with f o l l o w i n g the mother, whom he of suspects the the surveilling mother is

involved, employer. At court

asking questions

mother's p r o s p e c t i v e

the noted,

c l o s e of with

the

hearing to the

in this

matter,

the and

trial the

regard

i s s u e s of

custody

proposed

relocation:

" I w i l l s a y t h i s t o b o t h o f you. T h i s i s one o f t h o s e c a s e s t h a t j u d g e s h a t e . Two good p e o p l e . Two good p a r e n t s , and no g o o d s o l u t i o n s , so w h a t e v e r I d e c i d e i s g o i n g t o be t o u g h . I w i l l do my b e s t , b u t t h e r e i s n o t a good guy and a b a d guy " In a d d i t i o n t o t h e i r e v i d e n c e on t h e i s s u e o f c u s t o d y relocation, the p a r t i e s a l s o p r e s e n t e d and

the proposed

evidence child

r e g a r d i n g t h e i r earnings f o r the purpose of c a l c u l a t i n g support. The m o t h e r ' s e v i d e n c e i n d i c a t e d t h a t she year. The

anticipated testified

e a r n i n g a s a l a r y o f $48,000 p e r

father

t h a t he e a r n e d i n t h e r a n g e o f $2,000 t o $3,000 p e r month; t h e record does not indicate whether that estimate was gross

income o r n e t i n c o m e .

I n response

to d i s c o v e r y r e q u e s t s , the

f a t h e r i n d i c a t e d t h a t he had e a r n e d $19,000 f o r t h e y e a r as o f May 2009.

11

2090001 In addition, t h e mother submitted into evidence the

f a t h e r ' s bank statements.

Those b a n k s t a t e m e n t s i n d i c a t e t h a t

l a r g e amounts o f money were d e p o s i t e d o r t r a n s f e r r e d i n t o t h e f a t h e r ' s b a n k a c c o u n t s e a c h month. The f a t h e r a d m i t t e d that

b e t w e e n J a n u a r y a n d J u n e 2009, a p p r o x i m a t e l y $150,000 h a d b e e n deposited father purchase or transferred that into of h i s checking those funds account. were used The to or

explained

many

construction

supplies

f o r the

construction

r e m o d e l i n g j o b s on w h i c h he was w o r k i n g .

The f a t h e r t e s t i f i e d for his father

t h a t he does n o t know how much o f t h a t money he u s e d p e r s o n a l expenses explained only v e r s u s h i s b u s i n e s s expenses. The

t h a t he u s u a l l y went t h r o u g h h i s b a n k i n g

statements

two t i m e s p e r y e a r . The m o t h e r s u b m i t t e d i n t o e v i d e n c e a l i s t , compiled from

the f a t h e r ' s banking statements, of the f a t h e r ' s expenditures that The she m a i n t a i n e d father d i d not include construction expenses. The

d i d not dispute however,

t h e mother's that many

calculations.

father

stated,

restaurant

expenses

r e f l e c t e d on t h e m o t h e r ' s e x h i b i t i n c l u d e d c o s t s f o r c l i e n t s . The f a t h e r ' s nonbusiness expenses f o r t h e f i r s t s i x months o f

12

2090001 2009, as c a l c u l a t e d i n the month. in this matter, the trial court was of be mother's exhibit, averaged more

t h a n $9,700 p e r In its

judgment

d e t e r m i n e d , among o t h e r $4,166.66 p e r $50,000. $4,222.22 The month, trial

t h i n g s , t h a t t h e m o t h e r ' s income equates found the to an annual income to

which court

father's to an

income annual

monthly,

which

i s equivalent

gross

income o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y On appeal, the

$51,000. argues t h a t the trial court the to

father f i r s t

e r r e d i n awarding the mother p r i m a r y p h y s i c a l c u s t o d y of child and allowing her to relocate with the child

California. A c t ("the actions

The A l a b a m a P a r e n t - C h i l d R e l a t i o n s h i p P r o t e c t i o n A l a . Code 1975, to relocate In to governs another on

A c t " ) ,

Download 2090001.pdf

Alabama Law