Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 30-3-21 (2026)
Purposes of Article; Construction of Provisions.
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
Repealed by Act 99-438, p. 866, 1999 Regular Session, effective January 1, 2000.
(Acts 1980, No. 80-92, p. 121, §1.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19
cases, 1981–2008 · leading case: Gross v. Loewen, 522 So. 2d 306 (Ala. Civ. App. 1988).
Gross v. Loewen, 522 So. 2d 306 (Ala. Civ. App. 1988). “Ala.Code (1975), § 30-3-21. Surely, there are similar reasons for facilitating the enforcement of child support modification orders through service of nonresident defendants by publication in cases such as the one at bar.”
Jackson v. Jackson, 520 So. 2d 530 (Ala. Civ. App. 1988). “" Ala. Code (1975), § 30-3-21(a)(3). This purpose is particularly carried out by the trial court's exercising jurisdiction in this case.”
Ex Parte Punturo, 1000115 (Ala. 2-8-2002), 928 So. 2d 1030 (Ala. 2002). “" §§ 30-3-21(a)(1) and (5), Ala. Code 1975.”
Ex Parte Carstens, 728 So. 2d 128 (Ala. 1998). “" § 30-3-21(a)(3), Ala. Code 1975. Further, § 30-3-21(b) requires that "[t]his article [i.”
Rayford v. Rayford, 456 So. 2d 833 (Ala. Civ. App. 1984). “UCCJA, § 30-3-21, Code 1975 (1983 Repl. Vol.). This public policy and legislative intent lead us to the conclusion that the award in this case was neither unjust nor unfair.”
Ramsey v. Ramsey, 995 So. 2d 881 (Ala. Civ. App. 2008). “f the contestants; "(3) If substantial evidence concerning the child's present or future care, protection, training, and personal relationships is more readily available in another state; "(4) If the parties have agreed on another forum which is no less appropriate; and "(5) If…”
Ballard v. Ballard, 444 So. 2d 872 (Ala. Civ. App. 1984). “A third factor, see § 30-3-27 (c)(5), is whether the exercise of jurisdiction by an Alabama court would contravene the purposes of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act stated in § 30-3-21. One of these purposes is to deter the unilateral removals of children undertaken to…”
Bennett v. Bennett, 506 So. 2d 1021 (Ala. Civ. App. 1987). “The purposes of the UCCJA, found at § 30-3-21, Code 1975, are stated in pertinent part as follows: "(3) Assure that litigation concerning the custody of a child take place ordinarily in the state with which the child and his family have the closest connection and where…”
Case v. Case, 627 So. 2d 980 (Ala. Civ. App. 1993). “f the contestants; "(3) If substantial evidence concerning the child's present or future care, protection, training, and personal relationships is more readily available in another state; "(4) If the parties have agreed on another forum which is no less appropriate; and "(5) If…”
Bloodgood v. Whigham, 408 So. 2d 122 (Ala. Civ. App. 1981). “Code 1975, § 30-3-21 (a)(5). In this case it is undisputed that the mother abducted or removed this child in order to thwart the New York decree.”
Trillo v. Trillo, 506 So. 2d 1019 (Ala. Civ. App. 1987). “See §§ 30-3-21(a)(1), -4-80, Code 1975. Orders issued pursuant to these acts are final and conclusive as to all issues of fact and law decided and are to be adopted in the state in which they are to be enforced.”
P.A.T. v. D.B., 638 So. 2d 905 (Ala. Civ. App. 1994). “We are compelled to note that one major purpose of the UCCJA is to prevent abductions or removal of children from a court’s jurisdiction in order to obtain a more favorable custody determination in another jurisdiction.”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-21(a)(1) — 2 cases
Ex Parte Punturo, 1000115 (Ala. 2-8-2002), 928 So. 2d 1030 (Ala. 2002). “" §§ 30-3-21(a)(1) and (5), Ala. Code 1975.”
Trillo v. Trillo, 506 So. 2d 1019 (Ala. Civ. App. 1987). “See §§ 30-3-21(a)(1), -4-80, Code 1975. Orders issued pursuant to these acts are final and conclusive as to all issues of fact and law decided and are to be adopted in the state in which they are to be enforced.”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-21(a)(3) — 4 cases
Jackson v. Jackson, 520 So. 2d 530 (Ala. Civ. App. 1988). “" Ala. Code (1975), § 30-3-21(a)(3). This purpose is particularly carried out by the trial court's exercising jurisdiction in this case.”
Ex Parte Carstens, 728 So. 2d 128 (Ala. 1998). “" § 30-3-21(a)(3), Ala. Code 1975. Further, § 30-3-21(b) requires that "[t]his article [i.”
Alvarez v. Bressett, 602 So. 2d 433 (Ala. Civ. App. 1992).
Bandor v. Bandor, 636 So. 2d 1254 (Ala. Civ. App. 1994).
— Ala. Code § 30-3-21(a)(5) — 3 cases
P.A.T. v. D.B., 638 So. 2d 905 (Ala. Civ. App. 1994). “We are compelled to note that one major purpose of the UCCJA is to prevent abductions or removal of children from a court’s jurisdiction in order to obtain a more favorable custody determination in another jurisdiction.”
Db v. Pb, 692 So. 2d 856 (Ala. Civ. App. 1997).
Pat v. Db, 638 So. 2d 905 (Ala. Civ. App. 1994).
— Ala. Code § 30-3-21(b) — 1 case
Ex Parte Carstens, 728 So. 2d 128 (Ala. 1998). “" § 30-3-21(a)(3), Ala. Code 1975. Further, § 30-3-21(b) requires that "[t]his article [i.”
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.