Preview:

REL: 11/9/12

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions,
Alabama Appellate Courts, 300 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36104-3741 ((334) 229-0649), of any typographical or other errors, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is printed in Southern Reporter.

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013

2110531

K.T.D.

v.

K.W.P.

K.W.P.

v.

K.T.D.

Appeals from Cleburne Circuit Court (CS-07-6.01)



REL: 11/9/12

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013

2110531

K.T.D.

v.

K.W.P.

K.W.P.

v.

K.T.D.

Appeals from Cleburne Circuit Court (CS-07-6.01)



REL: 11/9/12

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013

2110531

K.T.D.

v.

K.W.P.

K.W.P.

v.

K.T.D.

Appeals from Cleburne Circuit Court (CS-07-6.01)



REL: 11/9/12

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013

2110531

K.T.D.

v.

K.W.P.

K.W.P.

v.

K.T.D.

Appeals from Cleburne Circuit Court (CS-07-6.01)



REL: 11/9/12

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013

2110531

K.T.D.

v.

K.W.P.

K.W.P.

v.

K.T.D.

Appeals from Cleburne Circuit Court (CS-07-6.01)



REL: 11/9/12

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013

2110531

K.T.D.

v.

K.W.P.

K.W.P.

v.

K.T.D.

Appeals from Cleburne Circuit Court (CS-07-6.01)



REL: 11/9/12

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013

2110531

K.T.D.

v.

K.W.P.

K.W.P.

v.

K.T.D.

Appeals from Cleburne Circuit Court (CS-07-6.01)



REL: 11/9/12

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013

2110531

K.T.D.

v.

K.W.P.

K.W.P.

v.

K.T.D.

Appeals from Cleburne Circuit Court (CS-07-6.01)



REL: 11/9/12

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013

2110531

K.T.D.

v.

K.W.P.

K.W.P.

v.

K.T.D.

Appeals from Cleburne Circuit Court (CS-07-6.01)



REL: 11/9/12

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013

2110531

K.T.D.

v.

K.W.P.

K.W.P.

v.

K.T.D.

Appeals from Cleburne Circuit Court (CS-07-6.01)



REL: 11/9/12

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013

2110531

K.T.D.

v.

K.W.P.

K.W.P.

v.

K.T.D.

Appeals from Cleburne Circuit Court (CS-07-6.01)



REL: 11/9/12

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013

2110531

K.T.D.

v.

K.W.P.

K.W.P.

v.

K.T.D.

Appeals from Cleburne Circuit Court (CS-07-6.01)



REL: 11/9/12

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013

2110531

K.T.D.

v.

K.W.P.

K.W.P.

v.

K.T.D.

Appeals from Cleburne Circuit Court (CS-07-6.01)



2110531 PER CURIAM.
K.T.D. ("the mother") appeals from a judgment of the Cleburne Circuit Court ("the trial court") that modified her
custodial rights to K.P. ("the child"). K.W.P. ("the father") cross-appeals from the same judgment insofar as the trial court failed to modify his child-support obligation.
Procedural History The child was born in March 2007 when the mother was 16 years old and the father was 21 years old. The record indicates that the trial court entered a judgment on or about December 4, 2007, that adjudicated the father as the father of the child, awarded sole custody of the child to the mother, awarded the father "standard" visitation with the child after a "phase-in" period, and ordered the father to pay $548 a month in child support to the mother. Neither party was ordered to provide health insurance for the child, but the parties were required to equally share the cost of "noncovered" medical expenses for the child. The record indicates that the December 2007 judgment stated that the parties "shall communicate regarding the ... child through the [father]'s mother and the [mother]'s mother." The father's

2



2110531 PER CURIAM.
K.T.D. ("the mother") appeals from a judgment of the Cleburne Circuit Court ("the trial court") that modified her
custodial rights to K.P. ("the child"). K.W.P. ("the father") cross-appeals from the same judgment insofar as the trial court failed to modify his child-support obligation.
Procedural History The child was born in March 2007 when the mother was 16 years old and the father was 21 years old. The record indicates that the trial court entered a judgment on or about December 4, 2007, that adjudicated the father as the father of the child, awarded sole custody of the child to the mother, awarded the father "standard" visitation with the child after a "phase-in" period, and ordered the father to pay $548 a month in child support to the mother. Neither party was ordered to provide health insurance for the child, but the parties were required to equally share the cost of "noncovered" medical expenses for the child. The record indicates that the December 2007 judgment stated that the parties "shall communicate regarding the ... child through the [father]'s mother and the [mother]'s mother." The father's

2



2110531 PER CURIAM.
K.T.D. ("the mother") appeals from a judgment of the Cleburne Circuit Court ("the trial court") that modified her
custodial rights to K.P. ("the child"). K.W.P. ("the father") cross-appeals from the same judgment insofar as the trial court failed to modify his child-support obligation.
Procedural History The child was born in March 2007 when the mother was 16 years old and the father was 21 years old. The record indicates that the trial court entered a judgment on or about December 4, 2007, that adjudicated the father as the father of the child, awarded sole custody of the child to the mother, awarded the father "standard" visitation with the child after a "phase-in" period, and ordered the father to pay $548 a month in child support to the mother. Neither party was ordered to provide health insurance for the child, but the parties were required to equally share the cost of "noncovered" medical expenses for the child. The record indicates that the December 2007 judgment stated that the parties "shall communicate regarding the ... child through the [father]'s mother and the [mother]'s mother." The father's

2



2110531 PER CURIAM.
K.T.D. ("the mother") appeals from a judgment of the Cleburne Circuit Court ("the trial court") that modified her
custodial rights to K.P. ("the child"). K.W.P. ("the father") cross-appeals from the same judgment insofar as the trial court failed to modify his child-support obligation.
Procedural History The child was born in March 2007 when the mother was 16 years old and the father was 21 years old. The record indicates that the trial court entered a judgment on or about December 4, 2007, that adjudicated the father as the father of the child, awarded sole custody of the child to the mother, awarded the father "standard" visitation with the child after a "phase-in" period, and ordered the father to pay $548 a month in child support to the mother. Neither party was ordered to provide health insurance for the child, but the parties were required to equally share the cost of "noncovered" medical expenses for the child. The record indicates that the December 2007 judgment stated that the parties "shall communicate regarding the ... child through the [father]'s mother and the [mother]'s mother." The father's

2



2110531

mother ("the paternal grandmother") and the mother and her mother ("the maternal grandmother") were the only individuals authorized to exchange custody of the child, which was to take place at the Heflin Police Department. The trial court also ordered the child's surname to be changed from the mother's surname at the time, T., to the father's surname, P.
On July 26, 2010, the mother filed a petition to modify the December 2007 judgment, and she sought: (1) specific and reasonable telephone visitation with the child while the father was exercising visitation, (2) an order requiring the father to provide her with advance written notice of his intention to travel with the child for distances greater than 60 miles, (3) an order requiring the father to notify her if the child stays anywhere other than the father's home overnight, (4) an order requiring the father to notify her if the child requires medical treatment during the father's visitation periods, (5) an order requiring the father to notify her if someone else is caring for the child during his visitation periods, (6) the "right of first refusal" if the father requires child care for more than 3 hours during his visitation periods, (7) removal of the requirement in the

3



2110531

mother ("the paternal grandmother") and the mother and her mother ("the maternal grandmother") were the only individuals authorized to exchange custody of the child, which was to take place at the Heflin Police Department. The trial court also ordered the child's surname to be changed from the mother's surname at the time, T., to the father's surname, P.
On July 26, 2010, the mother filed a petition to modify the December 2007 judgment, and she sought: (1) specific and reasonable telephone visitation with the child while the father was exercising visitation, (2) an order requiring the father to provide her with advance written notice of his intention to travel with the child for distances greater than 60 miles, (3) an order requiring the father to notify her if the child stays anywhere other than the father's home overnight, (4) an order requiring the father to notify her if the child requires medical treatment during the father's visitation periods, (5) an order requiring the father to notify her if someone else is caring for the child during his visitation periods, (6) the "right of first refusal" if the father requires child care for more than 3 hours during his visitation periods, (7) removal of the requirement in the

3



2110531
December 2007 judgment that the parties communicate through the maternal grandmother and the paternal grandmother, and (8) an order modifying the father's visitation rights with the child.
The father subsequently filed an answer and a counterclaim to modify the December 2007 judgment. The father sought sole custody of the child or, in the alternative, a modification of his visitation rights so that he had the child "50% of the time." The father also sought an order requiring him to pay health insurance for the child and a corresponding modification of his child-support obligation. Finally, the father sought to hold the mother in contempt for her failure to change the child's surname to the father's surname or to use the father's surname.
The trial court conducted an ore tenus hearing over two days

Download 2110531.pdf

Alabama Law