Case ID: so2d_829/html/0181-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "CRAWLEY, Judge. YATES, Presiding Judge,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Phyllis A. STAHR v. Roland O. STAHR.
    2000793.
    Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.
    March 8, 2002.
    Carla C. Ray, Birmingham; and Stephen L. Sexton of Sexton, Cullen & Jones, P.C., Birmingham, for appellant.
    Margaret L. Lathum and Curtis W. Gordon, Jr., of Gordon & Lathum, Birmingham, for appellee.
   CRAWLEY, Judge.

AFFIRMED. NO OPINION.

See Rule 53(a)(1), (a)(2)(A), and (a)(2)(E), Ala. R.App. P.; Rule 60(b)(6), Ala. R. Civ. P.; Crenshaw v. Crenshaw, 816 So.2d 1046 (Ala.Civ.App.2001); Watson v. Watson, 696 So.2d 1071 (Ala.Civ.App.1996); Brannon v. Brannon, 477 So.2d 445 (Ala.Civ.App.1985); and Hobbs v. Hobbs, 423 So.2d 878 (Ala.Civ.App.1982).

The appellee’s request for an attorney fee on appeal is denied.

THOMPSON, PITTMAN, and MURDOCK, JJ., concur.

YATES, P.J., concurs in part and dissents in part.

YATES, Presiding Judge,

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I agree that the wife is not entitled to retirement benefits in this case. However, I disagree that a subsequent request for periodic alimony after the trial court has reserved the issue of alimony must be based on a material change in circumstances. See my dissent in Crenshaw v. Crenshaw, 816 So.2d 1046 (Ala.Civ.App.2001).