Title: Brandon v. Brandon
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 1111538
State: Alabama
Issuer: Alabama Supreme Court
Date: November 30, 2012

REL: 11/30/2012 
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 Reporter. 
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 
Reporter of Decisions, 
Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36104-3741 
((334) 229¬
0 6 4 9 ) , o f 
any 
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 
be 
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 Reporter. 
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA 
OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013 
1111538 
Ex parte John E a r l Brandon 
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS 
(In r e : 
John E a r l Brandon 
v. 
Carolyn Anne Brandon) 
(Tuscaloosa C i r c u i t Court, DR-07-1178.02) 
STUART, J u s t i c e . 
John E a r l Brandon ("the f a t h e r " ) p e t i t i o n s t h i s C o u r t f o r 
a w r i t o f 
mandamus d i r e c t i n g t h e 
T u s c a l o o s a C i r c u i t C o u r t t o 
1111538 
t r a n s f e r t h e p o r t i o n o f t h i s c u s t o d y - m o d i f i c a t i o n 
a c t i o n 
f i l e d 
by C a r o l y n Anne Brandon ("the mother") i n v o l v i n g t h e p a r t i e s ' 
minor son t o t h e P i c k e n s C i r c u i t C o u r t . We g r a n t the p e t i t i o n 
and i s s u e t h e w r i t . 
F a c t s and P r o c e d u r a l H i s t o r y 
On F e b r u a r y 25, 2009, t h e f a t h e r and t h e mother were 
d i v o r c e d by a judgment o f t h e T u s c a l o o s a C i r c u i t C o u r t . 
The 
judgment approved and i n c o r p o r a t e d 
a s e p a r a t e agreement g i v i n g 
the mother p r i m a r y p h y s i c a l 
c u s t o d y o f t h e two then minor 
d a u g h t e r s
1 and g i v i n g t h e f a t h e r p r i m a r y p h y s i c a l c u s t o d y o f 
the minor son. The agreement c o n t a i n e d d e t a i l e d v i s i t a t i o n and 
c u s t o d y 
p r o v i s i o n s , 
as 
w e l l 
as 
p r o v i s i o n s 
c o n t r o l l i n g 
p o s t d i v o r c e 
r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s 
f o r such 
i t e m s as i n s u r a n c e , 
m e d i c a l expenses, e t c . S i n c e t h e d i v o r c e , t h e mother and t h e 
d a u g h t e r s have r e s i d e d i n T u s c a l o o s a C o u n t y ; t h e f a t h e r and 
the son have r e s i d e d i n P i c k e n s County. 
On June 7, 2012, t h e mother p e t i t i o n e d t h e T u s c a l o o s a 
C i r c u i t C o u r t f o r emergency 
r e l i e f t o e n f o r c e h e r r i g h t t o 
f i v e 
weeks o f summer 
v i s i t a t i o n 
w i t h t h e minor son, as 
p r o v i d e d i n t h e agreement; t o h o l d t h e f a t h e r i n contempt f o r 
1One o f the d a u g h t e r s i s no l o n g e r a minor. 
2 
1111538 
v i o l a t i n g 
v i s i t a t i o n 
o r d e r s ; and t o m o d i f y 
p o s t m i n o r i t y -
s u p p o r t p r o v i s i o n s of the agreement by t r a n s f e r r i n g c o n t r o l of 
funds f o r the o l d e r d a u g h t e r ' s p o s t s e c o n d a r y e d u c a t i o n t o the 
mother. 
The 
f a t h e r 
answered 
the 
p e t i t i o n , 
f i l e d 
a 
c o u n t e r p e t i t i o n s e e k i n g t o h o l d the mother i n contempt and 
s e e k i n g 
c l a r i f i c a t i o n of c o u r t o r d e r s r e g a r d i n g p o s t s e c o n d a r y 
e d u c a t i o n a l 
c o s t s 
f o r the 
o l d e r 
daughter, 
and moved 
t o 
t r a n s f e r 
t o the P i c k e n s 
C i r c u i t 
C o u r t 
a l l i s s u e s i n the 
mother's 
p e t i t i o n 
t h a t 
r e l a t e d t o the minor son. 
I n h i s 
m o t i o n f o r a change of venue, the f a t h e r e x p l a i n e d : 
" [ P ] u r s u a n t t o § 30-3-5, [ A l a . 
Code 1975,] s i n c e the 
p r i o r o r d e r s r e g a r d i n g c u s t o d y o f [the minor son] 
were 
e n t e r e d 
i n the 
C i r c u i t 
C o u r t 
of 
T u s c a l o o s a 
County, and s i n c e [the f a t h e r ] and [the minor son] 
have r e s i d e d i n P i c k e n s County f o r a p e r i o d of a t 
l e a s t 
t h r e e 
(3) 
c o n s e c u t i v e 
y e a r s 
i m m e d i a t e l y 
p r e c e d i n g 
the 
f i l i n g 
of 
[the mother's] 
p e t i t i o n , 
[the 
f a t h e r ] has a c h o i c e of venue as t o T u s c a l o o s a 
County o r P i c k e n s County." 
I n 
J u l y 2012, 
a f t e r 
c o n d u c t i n g 
a h e a r i n g on the f a t h e r ' s 
m o t i o n f o r a change of venue, the 
t r i a l 
c o u r t d e n i e d the 
motion. 
The f a t h e r then p e t i t i o n e d the C o u r t of C i v i l A p p e a l s f o r 
mandamus 
r e l i e f . 
The 
C o u r t 
o f 
C i v i l 
A p p e a l s 
d e n i e d 
the 
3 
1111538 
p e t i t i o n w i t h o u t an o p i n i o n . 
Ex p a r t e Brandon (No. 2111105, 
August 21, 2012) 
So. 3d 
( A l a . C i v . App. 2012) 
( t a b l e ) . 
S t a n d a r d o f Review 
"'A p e t i t i o n f o r t h e w r i t o f mandamus 
i s 
t h e a p p r o p r i a t e 
means by w h i c h t o 
c h a l l e n g e a t r i a l 
c o u r t ' s o r d e r 
r e g a r d i n g 
a change o f venue. The w r i t o f 
mandamus 
i s 
an 
e x t r a o r d i n a r y remedy; i t w i l l not be 
i s s u e d u n l e s s t h e p e t i t i o n e r shows " ' " ( 1 ) 
a c l e a r 
l e g a l 
r i g h t i n t h e p e t i t i o n e r t o 
the o r d e r s o u g h t ; (2) an i m p e r a t i v e 
d u t y 
upon t h e 
r e s p o n d e n t t o 
p e r f o r m , accompanied 
by a r e f u s a l t o do s o ; (3) t h e l a c k o f 
a n o t h e r adequate remedy; and (4) p r o p e r l y 
i n v o k e d 
j u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h e c o u r t . " ' " 
Ex 
p a r t e 
I n v e r n e s s 
C o n s t r . Co., 775 So. 2d 
153, 
156 
( A l a . 
2000) ( q u o t i n g Ex 
p a r t e 
Gates, 675 So. 2d 371, 374 ( A l a . 1 9 9 6 ) ) ; Ex  
p a r t e 
P f i z e r , I n c . , 
746 So. 2d 960, 962 
( A l a . 
1999).' 
"Ex p a r t e C h i l d r e n ' s Hosp. o f 
Alabama, 931 So. 2d 1, 
5-6 ( A l a . 2005) . 
" A p p l y i n g t h e g e n e r a l r u l e s t o 
a p e t i t i o n f o r a 
w r i t o f mandamus c h a l l e n g i n g a r u l i n g 
r e l a t e d t o 
venue, t h i s C o u r t has h e l d : 'The burden o f p r o v i n g 
improper venue i s 
on t h e 
p a r t y r a i s i n g t h e i s s u e and 
on r e v i e w o f an o r d e r 
t r a n s f e r r i n g o r r e f u s i n g t o 
t r a n s f e r , a w r i t o f mandamus 
w i l l n o t be 
g r a n t e d 
u n l e s s t h e r e i s 
a c l e a r showing o f e r r o r on t h e p a r t 
of t h e t r i a l 
judge.' 
Ex p a r t e 
F i n a n c e 
A m e r i c a 
 
Corp. , 507 So. 2d 458, 460 ( A l a . 1987) . 'Our r e v i e w 
i s l i m i t e d t o o n l y t h o s e f a c t s t h a t were b e f o r e t h e 
t r i a l 
c o u r t . ' 
Ex p a r t e Kane, 989 So. 2d 509, 511 
( A l a . 
2008)." 
Ex p a r t e Lugo de Vega, 65 So. 3d 886, 891 ( A l a . 2010). 
4 
1111538 
D i s c u s s i o n 
The 
f a t h e r contends t h a t , as the minor son's c u s t o d i a l 
p a r e n t , he has, p u r s u a n t t o § 30-3-5, A l a . Code 1975, 
a c l e a r , 
l e g a l 
r i g h t 
t o 
chose 
the 
venue 
f o r 
a d j u d i c a t i o n 
of 
the 
mother's c l a i m s i n v o l v i n g the minor son. 
The mother does not 
d i s p u t e t h a t the f a t h e r s a t i s f i e s the r e q u i r e m e n t s of § 30-3¬
5; she m a i n t a i n s 
t h a t the s t a t u t e does not a p p l y i n t h i s case 
because, she a r g u e s , the a c t i o n she 
f i l e d i n the 
T u s c a l o o s a 
C i r c u i t C o u r t p l e a d s not o n l y c l a i m s i n v o l v i n g the minor son, 
but a l s o c l a i m s as t o w h i c h venue i s p r o p e r i n the T u s c a l o o s a 
C i r c u i t C o u r t . 
She contends t h a t , because i t i s improper t o 
t r a n s f e r the e n t i r e a c t i o n , the c l a i m s i n v o l v i n g the minor son 
s h o u l d remain i n the T u s c a l o o s a C i r c u i t 
C o u r t . 
S e c t i o n 30-3-5 s t a t e s : 
" N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g 
any law t o the c o n t r a r y , venue 
of a l l p r o c e e d i n g s f o r p e t i t i o n s or o t h e r 
a c t i o n s 
s e e k i n g m o d i f i c a t i o n , i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , 
or enforcement 
of a 
f i n a l d e c r e e awarding c u s t o d y of a c h i l d 
... 
and/or 
g r a n t i n g 
v i s i t a t i o n 
r i g h t s 
... 
and/or 
g r a n t i n g 
p o s t - m i n o r i t y 
b e n e f i t s 
f o r 
a 
c h i l d 
or 
c h i l d r e n i s changed so t h a t venue w i l l l i e i n : (1) 
the 
o r i g i n a l 
c i r c u i t 
c o u r t 
r e n d e r i n g 
the 
f i n a l 
d e c r e e ; or 
(2) i n the 
c i r c u i t 
c o u r t of the 
c o u n t y 
where b o t h the c u r r e n t c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t o r , i n the 
case 
of 
p o s t - m i n o r i t y 
b e n e f i t s , where 
the 
most 
r e c e n t c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t , 
t h a t p a r e n t h a v i n g 
c u s t o d y 
a t the time of the c h i l d ' s a t t a i n i n g m a j o r i t y , 
and 
the 
c h i l d or c h i l d r e n have r e s i d e d f o r a p e r i o d 
of 
5 
1111538 
at 
l e a s t 
t h r e e 
c o n s e c u t i v e 
y e a r s 
i m m e d i a t e l y 
p r e c e d i n g 
the 
f i l i n g 
of 
the 
p e t i t i o n 
or 
o t h e r 
a c t i o n . 
The c u r r e n t or most r e c e n t c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t  
s h a l l 
be 
a b l e 
t o choose the 
p a r t i c u l a r venue 
as 
 
h e r e i n p r o v i d e d , r e g a r d l e s s of which p a r t y f i l e s the  
p e t i t i o n or o t h e r 
a c t i o n . " 
(Emphasis added.) 
S e c t i o n 30-3-5 p r o v i d e s t h a t venue f o r an a c t i o n s e e k i n g 
m o d i f i c a t i o n , 
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , 
or 
enforcement 
of 
an 
o r d e r 
i n v o l v i n g a c h i l d i s p r o p e r e i t h e r i n the c i r c u i t c o u r t t h a t 
i s s u e s the o r d e r or i n the c i r c u i t c o u r t of the county where 
the c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t and the c h i l d have r e s i d e d f o r a t 
l e a s t 
t h r e e y e a r s b e f o r e the 
f i l i n g of the a c t i o n . 
S e c t i o n 30-3-5 
f u r t h e r 
p r o v i d e s 
t h a t 
i f the 
c u s t o d i a l 
p a r e n t 
and 
c h i l d 
s a t i s f y the r e s i d e n c e r e q u i r e m e n t , 
then the c u s t o d i a l 
p a r e n t 
can s e l e c t the venue. 
See a l s o Ex p a r t e Baker, 575 So. 2d 98, 
99 
( A l a . C i v . App. 
1990); Johnson v. Meadows, 628 So. 2d 
892 
( A l a . 
C i v . App. 
1993); and C e r u z z i v. C e r u z z i , 688 So. 2d 
850 
( A l a . 
C i v . App. 
1997). 
The language i n § 30-3-5 i s c l e a r 
and 
unambiguous. 
The 
l e g i s l a t u r e u n e q u i v o c a l l y s t a t e d t h a t the 
c u s t o d i a l 
p a r e n t 
" s h a l l 
be 
a b l e 
t o choose 
the 
p a r t i c u l a r 
venue" w i t h r e g a r d t o c l a i m s i n v o l v i n g the 
c h i l d . 
"The 
word 
' s h a l l ' 
i s 
c l e a r 
and 
unambiguous 
and 
i s 
i m p e r a t i v e 
and 
mandatory." 
Ex p a r t e P r u d e n t i a l I n s . Co. of A m e r i c a , 
721 
So. 
6 
1111538 
2d 1135, 
1138 
( A l a . 1998). 
T h i s C o u r t i s bound by the words 
used by the l e g i s l a t u r e i n the 
s t a t u t e . 
In Ex p a r t e H e s t e r , 682 
So. 2d 6, 7 ( A l a . 1996), 
t h i s 
C o u r t 
r e c o g n i z e d t h a t "§ 30-3-5 g i v e s the 
t r i a l 
c o u r t 
no 
d i s c r e t i o n 
t o g r a n t or t o deny a motion 
by 
the 
c u s t o d i a l 
p a r e n t 
t o 
t r a n s f e r ; 
r a t h e r , 
i t p r o v i d e s t h a t the 
c u r r e n t 
c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t 
s h a l l be a b l e t o choose the venue." 
The 
H e s t e r C o u r t a d d r e s s e d 
f a c t s 
s i m i l a r t o the ones p r e s e n t e d 
h e r e . 
In H e s t e r , the f a t h e r was g r a n t e d p h y s i c a l c u s t o d y of 
the minor son, and the mother was g r a n t e d p h y s i c a l c u s t o d y o f 
the minor d a u g h t e r . 
The mother and daughter r e s i d e d i n the 
c o u n t y i n which the d i v o r c e judgment was e n t e r e d ; the f a t h e r 
and son r e s i d e d i n an a d j a c e n t county. 
S i x y e a r s a f t e r the 
e n t r y 
of the 
d i v o r c e judgment, 
the mother 
p e t i t i o n e d 
f o r 
c u s t o d y of the son. 
The 
f a t h e r moved, p u r s u a n t t o § 30-3-5, 
t o t r a n s f e r the a c t i o n t o the c o u n t y o f h i s and the son's 
r e s i d e n c e . 
The 
c o u r t d e n i e d 
the 
m o t i o n , 
and 
the 
f a t h e r 
p e t i t i o n e d 
t h i s C o u r t f o r a w r i t o f mandamus d i r e c t i n g 
the 
c o u r t t o t r a n s f e r the case t o the c o u n t y of h i s and the son's 
r e s i d e n c e . 
We g r a n t e d t h e w r i t , 
s t a t i n g : 
"The 
f a t h e r 
has 
shown 
t h a t he 
was 
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 c h i l d , t h a t he 
and 
7 
1111538 
h i s son have l i v e d i n F r a n k l i n County f o r over t h r e e 
y e a r s , and 
t h a t 
the u n d e r l y i n g 
a c t i o n 
i s a c u s t o d y 
p e t i t i o n i n v o l v i n g the c u s t o d y of the 
son 
o n l y . 
He 
has 
t h e r e f o r e d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t he has 
a c l e a r 
l e g a l 
r i g h t under 
§ 30-3-5 
t o chose 
the 
venue 
of 
t h i s 
a c t i o n and t h a t the 
t r i a l c o u r t had no d i s c r e t i o n t o 
deny h i s 
c h o i c e . " 
682 
So. 
2d 
7-8. 
The 
mother contends 
t h a t 
t h i s 
C o u r t ' s 
d e c i s i o n 
i n 
Ex 
p a r t e H e s t e r does not c o n t r o l t h i s case. 
She m a i n t a i n s , i n a 
case 
l i k e 
t h i s 
one 
i n v o l v i n g 
m u l t i p l e 
c l a i m s , 
t h a t , 
even 
though a c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t may 
s a t i s f y the r e q u i r e m e n t s of 
§ 
30-3-5 f o r the 
s e l e c t i o n of venue, i f the venue t o w h i c h 
the 
t r a n s f e r i s sought i s not 
a p r o p e r venue f o r a l l the 
c l a i m s , 
then § 30-3-5 has no a p p l i c a t i o n and the c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t does 
not 
get 
t o choose venue. 
She 
a r g u e s : 
" S e c t i o n 
30-3-5 
i s 
s i l e n t 
about 
s e v e r i n g 
or 
b i f u r c a t i n g c l a i m s i n o r d e r t o t r a n s f e r one 
or more 
but 
l e s s than a l l of the c l a i m s i n the 
p r o c e e d i n g . 
I f 
the 
case 
p e n d i n g 
was 
p r o p e r l y 
f i l e d 
i n 
T u s c a l o o s a , 
t h e r e 
i s 
no 
o p t i o n 
a v a i l a b l e 
f o r 
t r a n s f e r 
i f the 
e n t i r e case cannot be 
t r a n s f e r r e d . 
... 
[ A ] l l of the 
c l a i m s i n the 
' u n d e r l y i n g 
a c t i o n ' 
p e n d i n g must be p r o p e r i n the venue chosen of 
the 
p a r t y r e q u e s t i n g the 
t r a n s f e r . " 
To agree w i t h 
the mother and 
t o deny a c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t 
the o p p o r t u n i t y t o s e l e c t venue as p r o v i d e d i n § 30-3-5 
w i t h 
r e g a r d t o c l a i m s i n v o l v i n g a c h i l d i n a c u s t o d y - m o d i f i c a t i o n 
8 
1111538 
a c t i o n because t h o s e c l a i m s were f i l e d w i t h o t h e r c l a i m s would 
r e q u i r e t h i s C o u r t t o i g n o r e the p l a i n language o f the s t a t u t e 
and t o t h w a r t the purpose o f t h e s t a t u t e . 
L i k e the mother, 
t h i s C o u r t can e n v i s i o n s i t u a t i o n s where the a p p l i c a t i o n o f 
t h i s s t a t u t e may c r e a t e i n c o n s i s t e n t r e s u l t s and 
i n e q u i t i e s . 
However, t h i s C o u r t i s bound t o say what the law i s , not what 
i t s h o u l d be. 
The f a t h e r has shown t h a t he was 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 minor 
son, 
t h a t he and the minor 
son have 
r e s i d e d i n P i c k e n s County 
f o r over t h r e e y e a r s b e f o r e the 
mother 
f i l e d 
the p r e s e n t 
a c t i o n , 
and 
t h a t he 
r e q u e s t e d a 
change o f venue as t o o n l y t h o s e c l a i m s i n v o l v i n g the minor 
son. 
He has, 
t h e r e f o r e , d e m o n s t r a t e d 
a c l e a r 
l e g a l 
r i g h t 
under § 30-3-5 t o s e l e c t the venue f o r a d j u d i c a t i o n of those 
c l a i m s , 
and 
the 
T u s c a l o o s a 
C i r c u i t 
C o u r t 
was 
w i t h o u t 
d i s c r e t i o n t o deny h i s c h o i c e . 
C o n c l u s i o n 
Based on the f o r e g o i n g , the f a t h e r i s e n t i t l e d t o a w r i t 
of mandamus. 
The 
T u s c a l o o s a 
C i r c u i t C o u r t i s d i r e c t e d 
t o 
v a c a t e i t s o r d e r d e n y i n g the f a t h e r ' s motion t o t r a n s f e r the 
9 
1111538 
c l a i m s 
r e l a t e d 
t o t h e minor 
son and t o e n t e r an o r d e r 
t r a n s f e r r i n g 
t h o s e c l a i m s t o t h e P i c k e n s C i r c u i t C o u r t . 
PETITION GRANTED; WRIT ISSUED. 
W o o d a l l , B o l i n , P a r k e r , Main, and Wise, J J . , concur. 
Shaw, J . , 
c o n c u r s i n 
t h e r e s u l t . 
Murdock, J . , d i s s e n t s . 
Malone, C . J . , 
r e c u s e s h i m s e l f . 
10 
1111538 
SHAW, J u s t i c e ( c o n c u r r i n g i n t h e r e s u l t ) . 
I 
c o n c u r i n t h e r e s u l t 
r e a c h e d i n t h e main 
o p i n i o n . 
Alabama Code 1975, § 30-3-5, s t a t e s : 
" N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g any law t o the c o n t r a r y , venue 
of a l l p r o c e e d i n g s 
f o r p e t i t i o n s or o t h e r 
a c t i o n s 
s e e k i n g m o d i f i c a t i o n , i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , or 
enforcement 
of a 
f i n a l d e c r e e awarding c u s t o d y 
of a c h i l d o r 
c h i l d r e n 
t o a p a r e n t 
and/or g r a n t i n g 
v i s i t a t i o n 
r i g h t s 
... 
w i l l 
l i e 
i n : (1) t h e o r i g i n a l 
c i r c u i t 
c o u r t 
r e n d e r i n g 
t h e 
f i n a l 
d e c r e e ; 
or (2) i n t h e 
c i r c u i t c o u r t of t h e c o u n t y where b o t h t h e c u r r e n t 
c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t ... and t h e c h i l d or c h i l d r e n have 
r e s i d e d f o r a p e r i o d o f a t l e a s t t h r e e 
c o n s e c u t i v e 
y e a r s 
i m m e d i a t e l y 
p r e c e d i n g 
t h e 
f i l i n g 
o f 
t h e 
p e t i t i o n 
or o t h e r 
a c t i o n . 
The 
c u r r e n t 
or most  
r e c e n t c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t 
s h a l l be a b l e t o choose t h e  
p a r t i c u l a r venue as h e r e i n p r o v i d e d , 
r e g a r d l e s s of 
w h i c h p a r t y f i l e s t h e p e t i t i o n o r o t h e r a c t i o n . " 
(Emphasis added.) 
The 
mother 
argues 
t h a t 
t h i s 
Code 
s e c t i o n does 
not 
e x p r e s s l y 
p r o v i d e 
f o r t h e s e v e r a n c e 
o f 
c l a i m s , 
and, 
by 
n e c e s s i t y , of p r o c e e d i n g s , i n t h e manner o r d e r e d by t h i s C o u r t 
t o d a y ; the f a t h e r , on t h e o t h e r hand, argues t h a t t h e s e c t i o n 
does not e x p r e s s l y p r e c l u d e such a s e v e r a n c e . 
The mother i s 
c o r r e c t t h a t t h e language does not r e f e r t o a s e v e r a n c e o f the 
c l a i m s as a means o f c o m p l y i n g w i t h t h e mandate of t h e Code 
s e c t i o n ; however, t h e Code s e c t i o n governs venue o n l y , not 
m a t t e r s 
r e l a t i n g 
t o 
t h e 
p r o p e r 
p r o c e d u r e 
f o r 
a s s u r i n g 
11 
1111538 
c o m p l i a n c e w i t h 
i t . 
What t h e 
s e c t i o n does p r o v i d e , however, 
i s 
t h a t t h e " c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t 
s h a l l be a b l e t o choose t h e 
p a r t i c u l a r venue 
" 
O r d e r i n g t h e s e v e r a n c e o f t h e c l a i m s 
i n the manner c o n t e m p l a t e d by the main o p i n i o n e f f e c t u a t e s t h e 
a p p a r e n t 
i n t e n t 
o f t h e 
language 
o f t h e Code 
s e c t i o n ; 
p r e c l u d i n g such a s e v e r a n c e or o r d e r i n g a l l 
t h e c l a i m s t o be 
t r a n s f e r r e d t o the P i c k e n s C i r c u i t C o u r t would n o t a l l o w b o t h 
c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t s t o have a say i n c h o o s i n g t h e a p p r o p r i a t e 
venue, as t h e Code s e c t i o n c o n t e m p l a t e s i n cases 
i n v o l v i n g 
s p l i t c u s t o d y o f m u l t i p l e c h i l d r e n . O r d e r i n g t h e s e v e r a n c e o f 
the c l a i m s i n t h i s manner a l l o w s f o r c o m p l i a n c e 
w i t h t h e 
p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e Code s e c t i o n . 
A l t h o u g h t h e mother argues 
t h a t 
s e v e r a n c e 
o f t h e c l a i m s i s n o t i n t h e i n t e r e s t o f 
e f f i c i e n t 
j u d i c i a l 
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , 
t h e 
Code 
s e c t i o n 
c o n t e m p l a t e s c o m p l i a n c e , 
" [ n ] o t w i t h s t a n d i n g any law t o t h e 
c o n t r a r y , " 
thus 
r e q u i r i n g 
c o m p l i a n c e , 
n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g the 
a s p i r a t i o n a l 
n a t u r e 
o f t h e g e n e r a l 
l e g a l 
p r i n c i p l e s 
o f 
e f f i c i e n c y advanced by t h e mother. 
12 
1111538 
MURDOCK, J u s t i c e 
( d i s s e n t i n g ) . 
S e c t i o n 30-3-5, A l a . 
Code 1975, makes r e f e r e n c e s i m p l y t o 
"the 
c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t " ; 
i t does 
not 
r e f e r e n c e 
a c t i o n s 
i n v o l v i n g 
m u l t i p l e 
c l a i m s 
by 
and 
a g a i n s t 
two 
c u s t o d i a l 
p a r e n t s . 
That i s , § 30-3-5 does n o t c o n t e m p l a t e a case such 
as 
t h i s , i n w h i c h c u s t o d y of two o r more s i b l i n g s has been 
b i f u r c a t e d and i n 
w h i c h c l a i m s and c o u n t e r c l a i m s r e g a r d i n g t h e 
c o n t i n u e d 
c u s t o d i a l r i g h t s of b o t h 
p a r e n t s 
a r e p a r t o f a 
s i n g l e 
a c t i o n . 
C o n s e q u e n t l y , 
i t i s the 
a p p l i c a t i o n 
o f 
§ 30-3-5 t o t h e p r e s e n t case t h a t i s t h e s o u r c e of t h e venue 
i s s u e p r e s e n t e d , not t h e s o l u t i o n t o t h a t i s s u e . 
The c o r r e c t " s o l u t i o n " t o t h e venue i s s u e t h a t 
r e s u l t s 
from 
a p p l y i n g 
t h e 
l a s t 
sentence 
of § 30-3-5 
t o a 
case 
i n v o l v i n g 
two 
" c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t s " 
i s t h e same 
as 
t h e 
" s o l u t i o n " 
t o 
any 
a c t i o n 
i n v o l v i n g 
m u l t i p l e 
c l a i m s 
or 
c o u n t e r c l a i m s . 
When t h e venue of an a c t i o n i s a p p r o p r i a t e as 
t o one c l a i m or p a r t y , i t 
i s a p p r o p r i a t e as t o o t h e r c l a i m s o r 
p a r t i e s i n t h e same a c t i o n . 
See R u l e 8 2 ( c ) , A l a . R. C i v . P. 
("Where s e v e r a l c l a i m s o r p a r t i e s have been j o i n e d , t h e s u i t 
13 
1111538 
may be b r o u g h t i n any county i n w h i c h any one of t h e c l a i m s 
c o u l d p r o p e r l y have been 
b r o u g h t . " ) .
2 
The mother i s t h e "master" of h e r c o m p l a i n t . 
Venue f o r 
the mother's a c t i o n t o m o d i f y t h e p r i o r c u s t o d y judgment of 
the 
T u s c a l o o s a 
C i r c u i t C o u r t i s p r o p e r i n t h a t 
c o u r t , and 
venue f o r a l l o t h e r 
c l a i m s i n h e r a c t i o n i s p r o p e r i n t h a t 
c o u r t as w e l l . 
The main o p i n i o n 
c o n t a i n s no d i s c u s s i o n p e r se o f the 
i s s u e o f s e v e r a n c e , y e t s e v e r a n c e of the mother's and t h e 
2 I 
acknowledge 
t h a t 
§ 30-3-5 
opens 
w i t h 
t h e 
c l a u s e 
" [ n ] o t w i t h s t a n d i n g 
any 
law 
t o t h e 
c o n t r a r y . " 
L o g i c a l l y , 
however, t h i s c l a u s e can be a r e f e r e n c e o n l y t o "law" o u t s i d e 
the 
s t a t u t e 
i n which 
i t a p p e a r s . 
N o r m a l l y , 
one 
c o u l d 
u n d e r s t a n d 
t h i s 
c l a u s e 
t o mean 
t h a t whatever venue 
r u l e 
f o l l o w s 
i n t h e s t a t u t e 
w i l l 
supersede 
"law" o u t s i d e 
t h e 
s t a t u t e , f o r example R u l e 8 2 ( c ) . 
The o b v i o u s p r o b l e m 
w i t h 
a t t e m p t i n g t o a p p l y such an u n d e r s t a n d i n g 
i n t h e p r e s e n t 
case 
i s t h a t t h e venue c o n f l i c t we a r e here t r y i n g t o r e s o l v e i s 
i t s e l f e n t i r e l y a f u n c t i o n o f t h e s e n t e n c e s i n § 30-3-5 t h a t 
f o l l o w t h i s o p e n i n g c l a u s e . 
The c l a u s e " [ n ] o t w i t h s t a n d i n g any 
law 
t o t h e 
c o n t r a r y " 
t h a t 
opens 
t h i s 
s t a t u t o r y 
s e c t i o n 
l o g i c a l l y 
cannot 
r e s o l v e 
t h e venue 
c o n f l i c t 
c r e a t e d 
i n 
subsequent p o r t i o n s of t h e same s t a t u t e . 
Thus, R u l e 82(c) 
remains 
s t a n d i n g 
as a 
p e r f e c t l y w e l l 
s u i t e d 
d e v i c e 
f o r 
r e s o l u t i o n o f t h e venue c o n f l i c t now b e f o r e us. 
Looked a t from a n o t h e r 
p e r s p e c t i v e , 
t h e r e f e r e n c e 
t o 
" [ n ] o t w i t h s t a n d i n g 
any 
law 
t o 
t h e 
c o n t r a r y " 
s h o u l d 
be 
u n d e r s t o o d as r e f e r r i n g t o venue p r o v i s i o n s such as t h o s e i n 
§ 6-3-7, A l a . Code 1975, 
t h a t 
s u b s t a n t i v e l y and 
d i r e c t l y 
c o n f l i c t w i t h t h i s s t a t u t e . 
14 
1111538 
f a t h e r ' s 
r e s p e c t i v e 
c l a i m s 
i s a 
n e c e s s a r y 
r e s u l t 
of 
the 
C o u r t ' s 
h o l d i n g 
t o d a y . 
The 
t r i a l 
c o u r t 
e x p r e s s l y 
r u l e d , 
however, and gave reasons f o r so 
r u l i n g , 
t h a t the 
v a r i o u s 
c l a i m s 
and 
i s s u e s 
p r e s e n t e d 
s h o u l d 
not 
be 
s e v e r e d 
i n t o 
s e p a r a t e 
a c t i o n s . 
See Appendix F t o the 
f a t h e r ' s 
p e t i t i o n 
( t r i a l c o u r t ' s o r d e r ) ("[T]he case would have t o be b i f u r c a t e d 
w i t h the 
c l a i m s 
r e l a t e d t o the 
son 
b e i n g h e a r d i n 
P i c k e n s 
County and the c l a i m s r e l a t e d t o the d a u g h t e r s b e i n g h e a r d i n 
T u s c a l o o s a County. 
B i f u r c a t i o n c o u l d r e s u l t i n , among o t h e r 
t h i n g s , the p o s s i b i l i t y of o v e r l a p p i n g i s s u e s , i n c o n s i s t e n t 
r e s u l t s and the waste of j u d i c i a l r e s o u r c e s 
and the 
p a r t i e s ' 
r e s o u r c e s . " ) . 
B e f o r e a p p l y i n g the l a s t sentence of § 30-3-5 
i n the manner p r e s c r i b e d i n the main o p i n i o n , we 
f i r s t would 
be 
r e q u i r e d t o c o n c l u d e t h a t the 
t r i a l 
c o u r t exceeded i t s 
d i s c r e t i o n and e r r e d as a m a t t e r of law i n r e f u s i n g t o 
o r d e r 
a 
s e v e r a n c e 
of 
the 
v a r i o u s 
c l a i m s 
p r e s e n t e d 
i n 
t h i s 
p r o c e e d i n g . 
See Ex p a r t e T u r p i n V i s e I n s . Agency, I n c . , 
705 
So. 2d 368, 371 
( A l a . 1997) 
("In e x e r c i s i n g i t s d i s c r e t i o n 
[as 
to 
s e v e r a n c e ] , 
the 
t r i a l c o u r t s h o u l d c o n s i d e r the p r e j u d i c e 
t h a t may 
r e s u l t t o the p a r t i e s i f the c l a i m s are s e v e r e d , " 
as 
w e l l as " p r a c t i c a l i t y , 
j u d i c i a l economy, and the 
p o s s i b i l i t y 
15 
1111538 
of i n c o n s i s t e n t r e s u l t s . " (emphasis a d d e d ) ) . 
I do not b e l i e v e 
we can do t h a t i n t h i s case. 
I f we a r e not a b l e t o f i n d e r r o r as a m a t t e r o f law under 
normal s e v e r a n c e s t a n d a r d s , t h e n t h e o n l y a l t e r n a t i v e p r e m i s e 
upon which we c o u l d p r o c e e d would be t h a t t h e s t a t u t e 
i t s e l f 
somehow g i v e s t h e f a t h e r an a b s o l u t e r i g h t t o s e v e r a n c e i n a 
b i f u r c a t e d c u s t o d y case. 
No such r i g h t i s e x p r e s s e d i n t h e 
s t a t u t e . 
Nowhere i n § 30-3-5 i s t h e r e any mention o f t h e 
concept 
of 
s e v e r a n c e . 
The 
s t a t u t e 
speaks 
o n l y t o t h e 
a p p r o p r i a t e venue f o r a g i v e n " p r o c e e d i n g " o r " a c t i o n . " 
16