Court Opinion

ID: 7791608
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-30 21:35:39.64587+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:35:21.797205
License: Public Domain

Notably, in this case, the father's dependency complaint specifically averred that a previous child-support judgment had been entered by a Texas court and that he was paying the mother $365 per month in child support — allegations that the mother did not deny. Further, in the affidavit accompanying that complaint, the father specifically denied any desire to reduce his child-support obligation.
The juvenile court, in unilaterally reducing the father's child-support obligation, acted outside its jurisdiction because § 30-3A-611(a), Ala. Code 1975, provides that a *Page 810 
court of this state may modify a foreign child-support order only "[a]fter a child-support order issued in anotherstate has been registered in this state" (emphasis added). Although the juvenile court would have had
jurisdiction to act as an "initiating court" to request the appropriate Texas court to modify its judgment,see Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3A-206(a), the juvenile court in this case did not act under that statutory authority.
Accordingly, I agree with the conclusion in the main opinion that the juvenile court acted outside its jurisdiction in modifying the father's child-support obligation and that that purported modification is void. To the extent that the main opinion dismisses the mother's appeal as to the child-support issue, I concur. To the extent that the main opinion affirms the juvenile court's judgment as to the other issues raised by the mother, I concur in the result.