(a) Except as provided otherwise by this chapter, the provisions of this article apply to all orders determining custody of or visitation with a child whether such order was issued before or after September 1, 2003. To the extent that a provision of this article conflicts with an existing order determining custody of or visitation with a child or other enforceable agreement, this article does not apply to alter or amend the terms of such order or agreement which addresses the rights of the parties or the child with regard to a change in the primary residence of a child. Any person entitled to the legal or physical custody of or visitation with a child may commence an action for modification to incorporate the provisions of this article into an existing order determining the custody of or visitation with a child. Except as provided in subsection (c) of Section 30-3-165, this article shall not apply to a person who is on active military service in the Armed Forces of the United States of America and is being transferred or relocated pursuant to a non-voluntary order from the government.
(b) Sections 30-3-169.1 to 30-3-169.7, inclusive, shall not apply to a change of principal residence of a child to a residence which is 60 miles or less from the residence of a non-relocating parent who is entitled to custody of or visitation with the child or if the change or proposed change results in the child residing nearer to the non-relocating parent than before the change or proposed change, unless such change in the principal residence of a child results in the child living in a different state.
(Act 2003-364, p. 1017, §3.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
15
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 2005–2026 · leading case:
Meadows v. Meadows, 3 So. 3d 221 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008).
Meadows v. Meadows, 3 So. 3d 221 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “§ 30-3-162(b). [2] To allow the mother's decision to leave the marital residence to impact a determination of the child's principal place of residence in this case would appear to run afoul of the Parental Kidnaping Prevention Act ("PKPA"), codified at 28 U.”
J.J. v. J.H.W., 27 So. 3d 519 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “See Ala.Code 1975, § 30-3-162(a) (“Any person entitled to the legal or physical custody of or visitation with a child may commence an action for modification to incorporate the provisions of [the APCRPA] into an existing order determining the custody of or visitation with a…”
Toler v. Toler, 947 So. 2d 416 (Ala. Civ. App. 2006).
“See §§ 30-3-162(b), 30-3-165, & 30-3-169. If a challenge is instituted, the custodial parent must rebut the presumption that the intended relocation is not in the best interests of the child.”
Marsh v. Smith, 37 So. 3d 174 (Ala. Civ. App. 2009).
“” The trial court’s finding did not address the disputed issue under the Act — which was not whether the mother was domiciled in Mississippi or whether she resided in Mobile County pursuant to a pendente lite agreement — but whether the parties’ joint-custody arrangement should…”
C.E. v. C.C.H., 922 So. 2d 934 (Ala. Civ. App. 2005).
“…does not apply to an active-duty military parent relocating upon a nonvoluntary order from the government. § 30-3-162(a).”
Irions v. Holt, 156 So. 3d 956 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014).
· cites it 3× “We find no reason to conclude, as urged by the mother, that the timing of the father’s enlistment in the Army voids the exemption to the Act that is provided in § 30-3-162.”
I.L.C. v. J.D.B., 203 So. 3d 88 (Ala. Civ. App. 2016).
· cites it 3× “2 We do not agree with the mother’s assertion that the juvenile court interpreted § 30-3-162(b) as requiring a mandatory change of custody.”
Terry v. Terry, 154 So. 3d 993 (Ala. Civ. App. 2013).
“’’ We also note that § 30-3-162(b), Ala.Code 1975, provides that § 30-3-169.”
JJ v. Jhw, 27 So. 3d 519 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008).
· cites it 2× “See Ala.Code 1975, § 30-3-162(a) ("Any person entitled to the legal or physical custody of or visitation with a child may commence an action for modification to incorporate the provisions of [the APCRPA] into an existing order determining the custody of or visitation with a…”
Mary Ellen Williams v. Thomas M. Williams, Jr. (Ala. Civ. App. 2026).
· cites it 3× “" § 30-3-162(b), Ala. Code 1975. Thus, if the Madison residence was sixty miles or less from the father's residence, the provisions of the relocation act relating to custody modification and the presumptions and burdens attendant thereto, namely § 30-3-169.”
Crum v. Crum, 161 So. 3d 1212 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “” However, the mother overlooks the terms of Ala.Code 1975, § 30-3-162(a), which provides, in pertinent part, that the Act “does not apply to alter or amend the terms of [a child-custody] order or agreement which addresses the rights of the parties or the child with regard to a…”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-162(a) — 6 cases
J.J. v. J.H.W., 27 So. 3d 519 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008).
“See Ala.Code 1975, § 30-3-162(a) (“Any person entitled to the legal or physical custody of or visitation with a child may commence an action for modification to incorporate the provisions of [the APCRPA] into an existing order determining the custody of or visitation with a…”
C.E. v. C.C.H., 922 So. 2d 934 (Ala. Civ. App. 2005).
“…does not apply to an active-duty military parent relocating upon a nonvoluntary order from the government. § 30-3-162(a).”
Irions v. Holt, 156 So. 3d 956 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014).
“We find no reason to conclude, as urged by the mother, that the timing of the father’s enlistment in the Army voids the exemption to the Act that is provided in § 30-3-162.”
JJ v. Jhw, 27 So. 3d 519 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008).
“See Ala.Code 1975, § 30-3-162(a) ("Any person entitled to the legal or physical custody of or visitation with a child may commence an action for modification to incorporate the provisions of [the APCRPA] into an existing order determining the custody of or visitation with a…”
Crum v. Crum, 161 So. 3d 1212 (Ala. Civ. App. 2014).
“” However, the mother overlooks the terms of Ala.Code 1975, § 30-3-162(a), which provides, in pertinent part, that the Act “does not apply to alter or amend the terms of [a child-custody] order or agreement which addresses the rights of the parties or the child with regard to a…”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-162(b) — 7 cases
Meadows v. Meadows, 3 So. 3d 221 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008).
“§ 30-3-162(b). [2] To allow the mother's decision to leave the marital residence to impact a determination of the child's principal place of residence in this case would appear to run afoul of the Parental Kidnaping Prevention Act ("PKPA"), codified at 28 U.”
Toler v. Toler, 947 So. 2d 416 (Ala. Civ. App. 2006).
“See §§ 30-3-162(b), 30-3-165, & 30-3-169. If a challenge is instituted, the custodial parent must rebut the presumption that the intended relocation is not in the best interests of the child.”
Marsh v. Smith, 37 So. 3d 174 (Ala. Civ. App. 2009).
“” The trial court’s finding did not address the disputed issue under the Act — which was not whether the mother was domiciled in Mississippi or whether she resided in Mobile County pursuant to a pendente lite agreement — but whether the parties’ joint-custody arrangement should…”
I.L.C. v. J.D.B., 203 So. 3d 88 (Ala. Civ. App. 2016).
“2 We do not agree with the mother’s assertion that the juvenile court interpreted § 30-3-162(b) as requiring a mandatory change of custody.”
Terry v. Terry, 154 So. 3d 993 (Ala. Civ. App. 2013).
“’’ We also note that § 30-3-162(b), Ala.Code 1975, provides that § 30-3-169.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.