Custody arrangement are one of the most pressing issues the court encounters in a divorce proceeding. Typically, since child custody involves a determination pf where the child will primarily reside, custody battles can take a turn for the worse and be very emotionally tolling.
If the parties to the divorce action cannot agree to a joint schedule, the court is charged with the duty to create an arrangement that promotes the child’s best interest. In Alabama, there are two types of custody arrangements:
- Legal custody
- Physical custody
Almost always, unless for some unforeseen circumstance, legal custody is shared between the two parents. Joint legal custody grants each parent equal rights in decision-making authority regarding the minor child.
The court normally designates one parent with the final decision making authority in such a case that the parents cannot reach an amicable resolution. However, the parent with the final decision making authority cannot unilaterally make decisions without notifying the other parent.
On the other hand, judges in Alabama usually don’t award joint physical custody. Typically, there is a parent who receives primary physical custody, and a parent who receives secondary physical custody. This is mainly due to the fact that it is nearly impossible to achieve joint physical custody without entering some form of an agreement regarding a customized schedule for the parents to abide by.
The court will implement its own physical custody arrangement that serves the best interest of the child. On the other hand, divorce settlement agreements tend to favor joint physical custody. Joint physical custody allows each parent to spend comparable time with their child and attempts to make physical custody as balanced as possible.
The court’s tendency to favor sole physical custody over joint physical custody is depicted in a case arising out of divorce proceeding in Limestone County, Alabama, in the case of Vest v. Vest. Here, the parties were married in 2007 and had a child in 2010. In 2014, the husband filed for a divorce, and the wife filed a counterclaimed; both parties filed for sole custody of their child.
During a hearing that took place on August 15, 2015, the husband asked the trial court for permission to relocate with the child to Eva, Alabama in order to move in with the husband’s parents. The husband acknowledged the fact that if the trial court were to grant this relocation that it would require the child to transfer schools. The wife testified in trial court that the husband was addicted to pain medicine, had PTSD from his time serving in Iraq, and had violent behavior.
The trial court entered a judgment awarding joint legal custody to both parents and sole physical custody to the mother. The husband appealed the order contesting the award of sole physical custody to the mother.
The Court of Civil Appeals ruled that the trial court properly ruled in considering the health, safety, and well-being of the child in granting sole physical custody to the wife. Here, the appellate court looked at the fact that there was evidence before the trial court that showed that the husband suffered from a psychological disorder from his military service and that the husband had a violent past.
There was evidence pertaining to an incident that involved the husband punching a wall and beating a dog. There was also evidence presented that showed the husband abused pain medicine and knew that relocating would force his child to change school districts. Based on the above-mentioned evidence, the appellate court ruled the trial court did not error in awarding physical custody to the wife and affirmed the physical custody determination.
Custody arrangements are one of the most fickle and volatile problems encountered in a divorce proceeding. The court encourages parents to work out an agreement before of turning to the court system; generally, parents have a superior insight to determine what is the best for their child. However, that is not always the case.
If the parents are unable to reach an agreement, the court will get involved and implement their own custody arrangement based on the child’s best interest. Therefore, to ensure the best outcome for yourself and your child it is beneficial to seek out an experienced attorney’s assistance that can help guide you through this intricate process.
David Eugene Files and the Interplay of Ethics and Jurisdiction
In a case that made its way to the highest level of the state court system, the Alabama Supreme Court recently presided over an appeal beginning in Walker County. This case, Ex parte David Eugene Files, centers around a Rule 32 petition for postconviction relief. Files’ petition was dismissed by the Walker circuit court, with the dismissal being affirmed by the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals.
read articles
Sufficiency of Evidence: Reviewing the Admissibility and Application of Evidence Through US v. Mapson
In a decision that affirms the admissibility and sufficiency of several distinct types of evidence, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently presided over an appeal that found its roots in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.
read articles
Are Courts Always Free to Divide Property in a Divorce?
How courts divide real property in a divorce. Learn more from Ingram Law, LLC.
read articles
Till Death Do Us Part: Marital Property Division on Behalf of an Estate
In a case that demonstrates the limits of alimony awards, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals recently heard the case of Larry Shearry v. Christy Spivey, as personal representative of the Estate of Charlotte Shearry.
read articles
Fultondale Alabama Municipal Courts: Charges, Penalties, and Why You Should Seek an Attorney
You are driving home late between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 3:00 a.m. You get pulled over because the police officer states you are driving over the line, driving too slow, have a head light out or you have a taillight out.
read articles
The Crime of Stalking in Alabama
Another category of criminal offense in Alabama is stalking. Covered by Article 5, stalking includes offenses for stalking in the first and second degree, aggravated stalking in the first and second degree, and electronic stalking in the first and second degree.
read articles
Navigating the Division of Marital Property: Lessons from Barbara Brown v. Ernest Brown
In a case that demonstrates the intricacies of equitable division of marital property, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals recently presided over an appeal from the Jefferson Circuit Court in Jefferson County. The case of Barbara Brown v. Ernest Brown illustrates the importance of maintaining a clear record on appeal and emphasizes the necessity of full disclosure when dividing marital assets.
read articles
Navigating Legal Challenges; Brett Yeiter’s Fight Against a Death Sentence
In a case illustrating the tumultuous and complicated proceedings for challenging a death sentence, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals recently heard the appeal of Brett Richard Yeiter v. State of Alabama, stemming from Escambia County. Yeiter’s case underscores the critical need to adhere to procedural requirements, especially in cases involving severe sentences.
read articlesTrademark Infringement: Causes of Action Under the Lanham Act
Federal trademark law is primarily governed by the Lanham Trademark Act, also referred to as the Trademark Act of 1946. The Lanham Act, codified in 15 U.S.C. §§1051 to 1127, covers a wide range of trademark issues including registration, maintenance, protection, and the creation of a federal cause of action for trademark infringement.
read articlesschedule a consultation
