C.L.W. v. Madison Cnty. Dep't of Human Res., 2130744.
Decision Date | 05 December 2014 |
Docket Number | 2130744. |
Citation | 170 So.3d 669 |
Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
Parties | C.L.W. v. MADISON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES. |
Ronald W. Smith, Huntsville, for appellant.
Sharon E. Ficquette, chief legal counsel, and Karen P. Phillips, asst. atty. gen., Department of Human Resources, for appellee.
C.L.W. appeals from a judgment of the Madison Juvenile Court (“the juvenile court”) determining that D.S. is the father of J.W. (“the child”). We reverse.
This is the second time this case has been on appeal to this court. See C.L.W. v. Madison Cnty. Dep't of Human Res., 148 So.3d 1083 (Ala.Civ.App.2014). In C.L.W., this court set forth the procedural history of this case as follows:
“....
“On appeal, C.L.W. challenge[d] the juvenile court's June 25, 2013, order to the extent that it adjudicated D.S. as the father of the child.”
This court held, however, that the juvenile court's “designation of D.S. as the father of the child in its [June 25, 2013,] review order was not so clear and certain as to constitute a judgment on the merits of the paternity dispute [, and that, therefore, t]hat controversy remain[ed] pending before the juvenile court without a final adjudication.” 148 So.3d at 1086. Because there was no final judgment from which C.L.W. could appeal, we dismissed the appeal. 148 So.3d at 1086.
Subsequently, on May 6, 2014, the juvenile court entered a judgment adjudicating D.S. to be the child's father. On May 20, 2014, C.L.W. filed a postjudgment motion; that motion was denied by operation of law on June 3, 2014. See Rule 1(B), Ala. R. Juv. P. On June 5, 2014, C.L.W. filed his notice of appeal.
On appeal, C.L.W. argues that D.S. lacked standing to assert his paternity of the child because, he says, he is the presumed father of the child and he has persisted in his presumption of paternity. See Ex parte Presse, 554 So.2d 406, 418 (Ala.1989) ().
At the hearing held on the issue of...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Z.W.E. v. L.B.
...no other man has capacity "to challenge the presumed father's parental relationship."); see also C.L.W. v. Madison Cty. Dep't of Human Res., 170 So. 3d 669, 672 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014)(same). Thus, the alleged father is mistaken in his contention that an evidentiaryhearing was necessary for t......
-
R.D. v. S.S.
...indicating that [the presumed father] failed to persist in the presumption of paternity"), and C.L.W. v. Madison Cty. Dep't of Human Res., 170 So. 3d 669, 673 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014) ("Because [the putative father of a child] failed to present any evidence [indicating that the presumed father......
-
R.D. v. S.S.
...indicating that [the presumed father] failed to persist in the presumption of paternity"), and C.L.W. v. Madison Cty. Dep't of Human Res., 170 So. 3d 669, 673 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014) ("Because [the putative father of a child] failed to present any evidence [indicating that the presumed father......
-
J.R.C. v. Mobile Cnty. Dep't of Human Res.
...status," no other man has capacity "to challenge the presumed father's parental relationship."); C.L.W. v. Madison Cnty. Dep't of Hum. Res., 170 So. 3d 669, 673 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014) ("Because D.S. failed to present any evidence on this point, we conclude that the juvenile court could not h......