Sharon Gilbert Yates

This case is a divorce proceeding between Susan L. Gonzalez and Richard P. Gonzalez involving disputes over child custody of their three minor children, periodic alimony, attorney fees, and child support after the parties relocated from Illinois to Alabama. The trial court awarded primary custody to the father, alimony and fees to the mother, and declined to order the mother to pay child support. The Court of Civil Appeals reversed the custody award to the father while affirming the financial aspects of the judgment. The decision turned on whether the trial court had properly considered evidence of parental fitness, including the father's drinking and alleged abuse alongside the mother's post-separation conduct, in determining the children's best interests.

family law

The case involved an unemancipated 17-year-old minor petitioning for a waiver of parental consent to obtain an abortion under Alabama's Parental Consent Statute. The trial court denied the petition, concluding the minor was not sufficiently mature to decide independently and that the procedure was not in her best interests. On appeal, the Court of Civil Appeals reversed, determining based on the undisputed evidence that the minor was mature and well-informed enough to make the decision and that granting the waiver served her best interests, as carrying the pregnancy to term would jeopardize her education and financial support. The court emphasized that the trial court's reasoning would effectively nullify the statutory waiver provision.

abortionfamily law

This case is a child-support-modification dispute in which a divorced father was ordered in the original divorce judgment to pay monthly child support and alimony plus assume various marital debts, with jurisdiction reserved for possible college expenses. The mother later petitioned for an order requiring the father to contribute to the parties' son's college costs at the University of Alabama, while the father sought a reduction in his ongoing child-support obligation for the remaining minor child. After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court reduced the father's child-support payment by $266 per month and directed him to pay an additional $200 per month toward the son's postminority educational expenses. The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed, holding that the trial court had properly exercised its discretion under Ex parte Bayliss by weighing the parents' financial resources, the child's aptitude and commitment, and the standard of living the child would have enjoyed absent divorce, and that the resulting obligations were supported by the evidence and not plainly and palpably wrong. The court also upheld the child-support recalculation as consistent with Alabama Rule 32.

family law

The case involved paternal grandparents petitioning the juvenile court for custody of their two grandsons, ages 12 and 8, after the death of the children's infant sister, alleging the children were dependent due to the mother's involvement in a child abuse investigation. The juvenile court found the sons dependent under Alabama Code § 12-15-1(10) and awarded custody to the grandparents following hearings that revealed police incidents, pending divorce proceedings, and the mother's admission regarding the circumstances of the daughter's death. The mother appealed, arguing the matter was essentially a custody dispute in which she retained a prima facie right to custody absent a finding of unfitness. The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed, holding that dependency proceedings permit transfer of custody to a relative to protect the children's welfare without applying the unfitness standard from parental custody disputes.

family law

The case involved Wendy Minnifield's lawsuit against tattoo artist Greg Ashcraft and Skin Worx, Inc., claiming invasion of privacy after Ashcraft submitted photos of a tattoo on her upper breast to a national tattoo magazine without permission, allegedly causing her embarrassment and emotional distress. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants based on a release form Minnifield had signed and arguments that no defamation damages applied. The Court of Civil Appeals reviewed the evidence in the light most favorable to Minnifield, analyzed the distinct categories of invasion-of-privacy torts under Alabama law including appropriation and false light, and addressed whether the release covered post-tattoo publication or intentional conduct. The court reversed the summary judgment in part, holding that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the viability of the privacy claim and the scope of the release.

torts & liability

Patricia Nelson sued her employer Dollar General Corporation for workers' compensation benefits, claiming injuries sustained during her employment. The trial court granted the employer's motion for summary judgment in a brief order that stated only that the motion was granted, without including findings of fact or conclusions of law. The Court of Civil Appeals reversed the judgment and remanded the case, reasoning that Alabama Code § 25-5-88 requires a statement of the law, facts, and conclusions in final judgments for workers' compensation cases, including those resolved by summary judgment. The court determined that the absence of these required elements prevented meaningful appellate review.

labor & employmentprocedure