D.L.L. II v. B.J.
This text of 995 So. 2d 170 (D.L.L. II v. B.J.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
D.L.L. II (“the father”) appeals from the judgment of the Baldwin Juvenile Court awarding to B.J. and R.S.J. (“the maternal grandparents”) custody of five-year-old D.L. (“the child”), subject to supervised visitation by the father. Because it was untimely filed, we dismiss the appeal.
Although the parties have not raised the issue of jurisdiction to this court, we may consider the issue of jurisdiction ex meromotu. M.M. v. L.L., 989 So.2d 528 (Ala. Civ.App.2007); F.G. v. State Dep’t of Human Res., 988 So.2d 555 (Ala.Civ.App. 2007). An appeal from a juvenile court’s judgment must be filed within 14 days of the entry of that judgment or within 14 days of the denial of a timely post-judgment motion filed pursuant to Rules 52, 55, or 59, Ala. R. Civ. P. See Rules 1(B) and 28(C), Ala. R. Juv. P., and Rule 4(a)(1)(E), Ala. R.App. P. See also F.G. v. State Dep’t of Human Res., 988 So.2d at 557.
On August 28, 2006, the maternal grandparents filed a “petition for custody” and an “emergency petition for custody” in the juvenile court. The “petition for custody” alleged that the child’s mother, who had been the child’s primary caregiver, had died on August 5, 2006, and that the father was in a drug-rehabilitation program. Further, the petition alleged that the father had a history of drug use, had never been the primary caregiver of the child, had failed to support the child, and had been violent in the home. The “emergency petition for custody” contained the same allegations and, in addition to seeking custody of the child, sought exclusive use of the mother and father’s marital home.
The juvenile court ultimately held a hearing on June 26, 2007, at which it heard disputed, oral testimony and admitted several exhibits. On July 25, 2007, the juvenile court entered a judgment awarding the maternal grandparents custody of the child, subject to supervised visitation by the father.1 On August 7, 2007, the father [172]*172timely filed a postjudgment motion. That postjudgment motion was denied by operation of law on August 21, 2007. See Rule 1(B), Ala. R. Juv. P. Although the juvenile court purported to enter an order altering its previous judgment on August 24, 2007, it did not have jurisdiction to enter that order. Id.; D.V.P. v. T.W.P., 905 So.2d 853, 856 (Ala.Civ.App.2005). After the father’s postjudgment motion was denied by operation of law, the father had 14 days (until September 4, 2007) to file his notice of appeal. The father’s September 5, 2007, notice of appeal is untimely; therefore, we dismiss the appeal. Holmes v. Powell, 363 So.2d 760, 762 (Ala.1978) (“A timely filing of the notice of appeal is jurisdictional, ... the sanction to be applied for an untimely filing being dismissal.”); M.M. v. L.L., supra; and F.G. v. State Dep’t of Human Res., supra.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
995 So. 2d 170, 2008 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 213, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dll-ii-v-bj-alacivapp-2008.