Opinion ID: 1689731
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Extraordinary Expenses

Text: The trial court's judgment stated: A judgment is awarded against the [father] in favor of the [mother] for the sum of $22,794.00 representing reimbursement towards 90% of the hospital stay visit, cost of the van, and cost of renovation of the homeplace. The Court considers all of these to be reasonably necessary expenses for the child in light of his disabilities. The father argues that this portion of the trial court's order was a retroactive modification of the divorce judgment. The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed that portion of the trial court's judgment, however, on the authority of Rule 32(C)(4), Ala. R. Jud. Admin., which allows a trial court to make additional awards for extraordinary medical... expenses in excess of the basic child-support obligation if the court determines that such [additional] awards are in the best interest of the [child] and [if the court] states its reasons for making such additional awards. We affirm the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals insofar as it affirmed the award of those extraordinary expenses. AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED. HOOPER, C.J., and MADDOX, HOUSTON, COOK, SEE, LYONS, BROWN, and ENGLAND, JJ., concur. JOHNSTONE, J., concurs in part and dissents in part.