Ex parte Brewington
Decision Date | 16 December 1983 |
Citation | 445 So.2d 294 |
Parties | Ex parte Faye T. Blair BREWINGTON. (Re James Mitchell BLAIR v. Faye T. Blair BREWINGTON). 82-923. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Stephen V. Hammond of Chenault, Chenault & Hammond, Decatur, for petitioner.
Bingham D. Edwards, Decatur, for respondent.
The trial court in this case ordered respondent, the father of a permanently disabled child, to support the child past the age of majority, and further, increased the amount of support payments the father was already making. The Court of Civil Appeals, 445 So.2d 292, reversed the order of the trial court because it felt compelled to follow the decision of this Court in Reynolds v. Reynolds, 274 Ala. 477, 149 So.2d 770 (1963), which held that, because the Alabama statute providing for child support (Code of 1975, § 30-3-3) had been held to apply only to minor children, the trial court was without jurisdiction to order a parent to support an adult child. We granted certiorari to consider petitioner's request that this Court overrule Reynolds, supra.
The facts as set out in the opinion rendered by the Court of Civil Appeals are as follows:
Although we appreciate the decision of the Court of Civil Appeals which follows the general rule announced in Reynolds, supra, this Court concludes that the decision of the trial court is the result which accords with the legislature's intent in this instance. To the extent that Reynolds, supra, is inconsistent with this holding, it is specifically overruled.
An analysis of the Alabama cases reveals that Reynolds -type decisions were based on the position that, absent a statute or agreement, no common-law authority existed to impose upon a non-custodial parent the obligation to support his adult child. However, the majority trend is to recognize an exception to this rule when the adult child is so mentally and/or physically disabled as to be unable to support himself. See e.g. Kruvant v. Kruvant, 100 N.J.Super. 107, 241 A.2d 259 (1968); Fincham v. Levin, 155 So.2d 883 (Fla.App.1963); Wells v. Wells, 227 N.C. 614, 44 S.E.2d 31 (1947); O'Malley v. O'Malley, 105 Pa.Super. 232, 161 A. 883 (1932).
The Court in Reynolds based part of its decision on Murrah v. Bailes, 255 Ala. 178, 50 So.2d 735 (1951), which held that the term "children" as used in § 30-3-1 was clearly meant to apply only to minor children. The statute, however, does not express such a limitation, and such a narrow interpretation is unacceptable. In the frame of reference of the present case, we believe the legislature intended that support be provided for dependent children, regardless of whether that dependency results from minority, or from physical and/or mental disabilities that continue to render them incapable of self-support beyond minority.
Thus, we adopt the reasoning of the New Jersey Superior Court in the case of Kruvant v. Kruvant, supra, where the facts were similar to those of the case at bar. The case involved an appeal by a divorced husband from orders of the lower court reopening and modifying provisions for support of his son contained in a divorce decree. The husband argued that the New Jersey court did not have the jurisdiction under New Jersey's divorce statutes to order support for an adult child. The New Jersey court, however, said of its divorce statute:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Smith v. Smith
... ... A thorough analysis of the cases cited by the dissent serves only to buttress this conclusion ... The dissent cites Ex parte Brewington, 445 So.2d 294 (Ala.1983), wherein the Alabama Supreme Court held that the Alabama child support laws [433 MICH 631] should not be ... ...
-
Waddell v. Waddell
... ... an award of postminority educational support for the benefit of the parties' two sons in accordance with our Supreme Court's holding in Ex parte Bayliss, 550 So.2d 986 (Ala.1989), and an award of periodic alimony. The father responded to the mother's petition by, among other things, filing ... of health-insurance costs because there was no evidence that the parties' adult son was physically or mentally disabled, see Ex parte Brewington, 445 So.2d 294 (Ala.1983), and it did "not appear that the trial court considered the maintenance of health insurance to be in the nature of ... ...
-
Ravenstein v. Ravenstein
... ... See Ex parte Brewington, 445 So.2d 294 (Ala.1983) (interpreting children in the child support statute to mean dependent children, not minor children, thus ... ...
-
Christopher v. Christopher (In re Christopher.)
... 145 So.3d 60 Ex parte Carolyn Sue CHRISTOPHER. (In re Carolyn Sue Christopher v. Charles Phillip Christopher). 1120387. Supreme Court of Alabama. Oct. 4, 2013 ... Ex parte Brewington, 445 So.2d 294, 296 (Ala.1983) (affirming an order requiring support payments past the age of majority for a child suffering from a birth defect and ... ...