Alabama Court of Civil Appeals, 1999

Bell v. Ard

Alabama Court of Civil Appeals · Decided February 12, 1999 · Robertson, Yates, Monroe, Thompson, Crawley

730 So. 2d 237; 1999 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 93; 1999 WL 64917 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Opinion of the Court

ROBERTSON, Presiding Judge.

AFFIRMED. NO OPINION.

See Rule 53(a)(1) and (a)(2)(C), Ala.R.App. P.; Rule 52(a), Ala.R.Civ.P.; Ex parte Patronas, 693 So.2d 473 (Ala. 1997); Ex parte Bryowsky, 676 So.2d 1322 (Ala. 1996); Satterfield v. Decker, 437 So.2d 506 (Ala. 1983); D.C. v. C.O., 721 So.2d 195 (Ala.Civ.App. 1998); Black v. Black, 625 So.2d 450 (Ala.Civ.App. 1993); Scanlan v. Rowinsky, 611 So.2d 1092 (Ala.Civ.App. 1992); and H.T. v. C.T.W., 569 So.2d 418 (Ala.Civ.App. 1990).

YATES, MONROE, and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. CRAWLEY, J., concurs in the result.

Concurring Opinion

CRAWLEY, Judge,

concurring in the result.

I concur in the result, because the mother is barred by the doctrine of res judicata from relitigating the paternity issue, see Ex parte Presse, 554 So.2d 406, 411 (Ala. 1989), and because the mother, in attempting to have custody modified, failed to meet the standard imposed by Ex parte McLendon, 455 So.2d 863, 866 (Ala. 1984). Therefore, the trial court’s judgment awarding custody to the ex-husband is legally correct.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.