(a) For the purposes of this section, the following terms have the following meanings:
(1) GRANDPARENT. The parent of a parent, whether the relationship is created biologically or by adoption.
(2) HARM. A finding by the court, by clear and convincing evidence, that without court-ordered visitation by the grandparent, the child’s emotional, mental, or physical well-being has been, could reasonably be, or would be jeopardized.
(b) A grandparent may: (i) file an original action in a circuit court where his or her grandchild resides or any other court exercising jurisdiction with respect to the grandchild; or (ii) file a motion to intervene in any action when any court in this state has before it any issue concerning custody of the grandchild, including a domestic relations proceeding involving the parent or parents of the grandchild, for reasonable visitation rights with respect to the grandchild if any of the following circumstances exist:
(1) An action for a divorce or legal separation of the parents has been filed or the marital relationship between the parents of the child has been severed by death or divorce.
(2) The child was born out of wedlock and the petitioner is a maternal grandparent of the child.
(3) The child was born out of wedlock, the petitioner is a paternal grandparent of the child, and paternity has been legally established.
(4) An action to terminate the parental rights of a parent or parents has been filed or the parental rights of a parent has been terminated by court order; provided, however, the right of the grandparent to seek visitation terminates if the court approves a petition for adoption by an adoptive parent, unless the visitation rights are allowed pursuant to Section 26-10E-29.
(c)(1) There is a rebuttable presumption that a fit parent’s decision to deny or limit visitation to the petitioner is in the best interest of the child.
(2) To rebut the presumption, the petitioner shall prove both of the following by clear and convincing evidence:
a. The petitioner has established a significant and viable relationship with the child for whom he or she is requesting visitation.
b. Visitation with the petitioner is in the best interest of the child.
(d) To establish a significant and viable relationship with the child, the petitioner shall prove any of the following by clear and convincing evidence:
(1)a. The child resided with the petitioner for at least six consecutive months with or without a parent present within the three years preceding the filing of the petition.
b. The petitioner was the caregiver to the child on a regular basis for at least six consecutive months within the three years preceding the filing of the petition.
c. The petitioner had frequent or regular contact with the child for at least 12 consecutive months which resulted in a strong and meaningful relationship with the child within the three years preceding the filing of the petition.
(2) Any other facts that establish the loss of the relationship between the petitioner and the child is likely to harm the child.
(e) To establish that visitation with the petitioner is in the best interest of the child, the petitioner shall prove all of the following by clear and convincing evidence:
(1) The petitioner has the capacity to give the child love, affection, and guidance.
(2) The loss of an opportunity to maintain a significant and viable relationship between the petitioner and the child has caused or is reasonably likely to cause harm to the child.
(3) The petitioner is willing to cooperate with the parent or parents if visitation with the child is allowed.
(f) The court shall make specific written findings of fact in support of its rulings.
(g)(1) A grandparent or grandparents who are married to each other may not file a petition seeking an order for visitation more than once every 24 months absent a showing of good cause. The fact that a grandparent or grandparents who are married to each other have petitioned for visitation shall not preclude another grandparent from subsequently petitioning for visitation within the 24-month period. After an order for grandparent visitation has been granted, the parent, guardian, or legal custodian of the child may file a petition requesting the court to modify or terminate a grandparent’s visitation time with a grandchild.
(2) The court may modify or terminate visitation upon proof that a material change in circumstances has occurred since the award of grandparent visitation was made and a finding by the court that the modification or termination of the grandparent visitation rights is in the best interest of the child.
(h) The court may award any party reasonable expenses incurred by or on behalf of the party, including costs, communication expenses, attorney fees, guardian ad litem fees, investigative fees, expenses for court-appointed witnesses, travel expenses, and child care during the course of the proceedings.
(i) Notwithstanding any provisions of this section to the contrary:
(1) A petition filed by a grandparent having standing under Chapter 10E of Title 26 seeking visitation shall be filed in probate court and is governed by Section 26-10E-29, rather than by this section if either of the following circumstances exists:
a. The grandchild has been the subject of an adoption proceeding other than the one creating the grandparent relationship.
b. The grandchild is the subject of a pending or finalized adoption proceeding.
(2) A grandparent seeking visitation pursuant to Section 12-15-314 shall be governed by that section rather than by this section; and
(3) A parent of a parent whose parental rights have been terminated by a court order in which the petitioner was the State Department of Human Resources, shall not be awarded any visitation rights pursuant to this section.
(j) The right of a grandparent to maintain visitation rights pursuant to this section terminates upon the adoption of the child except as provided by Section 26-10E-29.
(k) All of the following are necessary parties to any action filed under this section:
(1) Unless parental rights have been terminated, the parent or parents of the child.
(2) Every other person who has been awarded custody or visitation with the child pursuant to court order.
(3) Any agency having custody of the child pursuant to court order.
(l) In addition, upon filing of the action, notice shall be given to all other grandparents of the child. The petition shall affirmatively state the name and address upon whom notice has been given.
(m) Service and notice shall be made in the following manner:
(1) Service of process on necessary parties shall be made in accordance with the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure.
(2) As to any other person to whom notice is required to be given under subsection (l), notice shall be given by first class mail to the last known address of the person or persons entitled to notice. Notice shall be effective on the third day following mailing.
(n) Notwithstanding subsection (m), the notice requirements provided by this section may be limited or waived by the court to the extent necessary to protect the confidentiality and the health, safety, or liberty of a person or a child.
(o) Upon filing an action under this section and after giving special weight to the fundamental right of a fit parent to decide which associations are in the best interest of his or her child, the court, after a hearing, may enter a pendente lite order granting temporary visitation rights to a grandparent, pending a final order, if the court determines from the evidence that: (i) the petitioner has established a significant and viable relationship with the child for whom he or she is requesting visitation; (ii) visitation would be in the best interest of the child; and (iii) any of the following circumstances exist:
(1) The child resided with the grandparent for at least six consecutive months within the three years preceding the filing of the petition.
(2) The grandparent was the caregiver of the child on a regular basis for at least six consecutive months within the three years preceding the filing of the petition.
(3) The grandparent provided significant financial support for the child for at least six consecutive months within the three years preceding the filing of the petition.
(4) The grandparent had frequent or regular contact with the child for at least 12 consecutive months within the three years preceding the filing of the petition.
(p) As a matter of public policy, this section recognizes the importance of family and the fundamental rights of parents and children. In the context of grandparent visitation under this section, a fit parent’s decision regarding whether to permit grandparent visitation is entitled to special weight due to a parent’s fundamental right to make decisions concerning the rearing of his or her child. Nonetheless, a parent’s interest in a child shall be balanced against the long-recognized interests of the state as parens patriae. Thus, as applied to grandparent visitation under this section, this section balances the constitutional rights of parents and children by imposing an enhanced standard of review and consideration of the harm to a child caused by the parent’s limitation or termination of a prior relationship of a child to his or her grandparent.
(Act 2016-362, §§1, 2; Act 2025-407, §1.)
Notes of Decisions
Schillaci v. Gentry (Ex parte Gentry), 238 So. 3d 66 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017).
· cites it 50× “In August 2016, the maternal grandmother and the maternal stepgrandfather filed a complaint in the trial court seeking an award of visitation with the children pursuant to Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3-4.2, which became effective on August 1, 2016.”
Ex parte Gentry, 228 So. 3d 1016 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017).
· cites it 5× “The father and - his wife, Whitney Gen-trys who died in February 2014, were the parents of three children, In August 2016, the maternal grandmother and the maternal stepgrandfather filed a complaint in the trial court seeking an award of visitar tion with the- children pursuant…”
L.M. v. G.S., 243 So. 3d 822 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017).
“To that end, the Court finds it necessary to award visitation to the paternal grandparents pursuant to the provisions of § 30-3-4.2 of the Code of Alabama 1975. Despite a finding that the minor child is not dependent, the Court asserts jurisdiction to award visitation pursuant…”
Howard v. McElrath (Ex parte McElrath), 258 So. 3d 364 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
· cites it 14× “On that same date, the father filed a counterclaim requesting, among other things, an order declaring Alabama's Grandparent Visitation Act ("the GVA"), § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975, facially unconstitutional.”
S.B. v. K.J. (in Re K.j.), 266 So. 3d 753 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
· cites it 10× “On September 7, 2017, the grandmother filed a petition in the circuit court seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
S.B. v. K.J. (in Re K.j.), 266 So. 3d 753 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
· cites it 10× “On September 7, 2017, the grandmother filed a petition in the circuit court seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
Bonner v. Jeter (Ex parte Jeter), 261 So. 3d 1219 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
· cites it 9× “On September 7, 2017, the maternal grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
Bonner v. Jeter (Ex parte Jeter), 261 So. 3d 1219 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
· cites it 9× “On September 7, 2017, the maternal grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
Steamships v. J.S. (In re J.S.), 263 So. 3d 728 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
· cites it 9× “The paternal grandmother insists that her request for visitation is not a request for grandparent visitation under Alabama's most recent grandparent-visitation statute, codified at Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3-4.2. Thus, we will not consider the mother's argument that, although the…”
Steamships v. J.S. (In re J.S.), 263 So. 3d 728 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
· cites it 9× “The paternal grandmother insists that her request for visitation is not a request for grandparent visitation under Alabama's most recent grandparent-visitation statute, codified at Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3-4.2. Thus, we will not consider the mother's argument that, although the…”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(a)(1) — 2 cases
Schillaci v. Gentry (Ex parte Gentry), 238 So. 3d 66 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017).
“In August 2016, the maternal grandmother and the maternal stepgrandfather filed a complaint in the trial court seeking an award of visitation with the children pursuant to Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3-4.2, which became effective on August 1, 2016.”
Ex parte Gentry, 228 So. 3d 1016 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017).
“The father and - his wife, Whitney Gen-trys who died in February 2014, were the parents of three children, In August 2016, the maternal grandmother and the maternal stepgrandfather filed a complaint in the trial court seeking an award of visitar tion with the- children pursuant…”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(a)(2) — 2 cases
Schillaci v. Gentry (Ex parte Gentry), 238 So. 3d 66 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017).
“In August 2016, the maternal grandmother and the maternal stepgrandfather filed a complaint in the trial court seeking an award of visitation with the children pursuant to Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3-4.2, which became effective on August 1, 2016.”
Howard v. McElrath (Ex parte McElrath), 258 So. 3d 364 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On that same date, the father filed a counterclaim requesting, among other things, an order declaring Alabama's Grandparent Visitation Act ("the GVA"), § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975, facially unconstitutional.”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(b) — 10 cases
Ex parte Gentry, 228 So. 3d 1016 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017).
“The father and - his wife, Whitney Gen-trys who died in February 2014, were the parents of three children, In August 2016, the maternal grandmother and the maternal stepgrandfather filed a complaint in the trial court seeking an award of visitar tion with the- children pursuant…”
Schillaci v. Gentry (Ex parte Gentry), 238 So. 3d 66 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017).
“In August 2016, the maternal grandmother and the maternal stepgrandfather filed a complaint in the trial court seeking an award of visitation with the children pursuant to Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3-4.2, which became effective on August 1, 2016.”
S.B. v. K.J. (in Re K.j.), 266 So. 3d 753 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the grandmother filed a petition in the circuit court seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
S.B. v. K.J. (in Re K.j.), 266 So. 3d 753 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the grandmother filed a petition in the circuit court seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
Bonner v. Jeter (Ex parte Jeter), 261 So. 3d 1219 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the maternal grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(b)(1) — 2 cases
Bonner v. Jeter (Ex parte Jeter), 261 So. 3d 1219 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the maternal grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
Bonner v. Jeter (Ex parte Jeter), 261 So. 3d 1219 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the maternal grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(b)(2) — 2 cases
Bonner v. Jeter (Ex parte Jeter), 261 So. 3d 1219 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the maternal grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
Bonner v. Jeter (Ex parte Jeter), 261 So. 3d 1219 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the maternal grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(c) — 1 case
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(c)(1) — 2 cases
Schillaci v. Gentry (Ex parte Gentry), 238 So. 3d 66 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017).
“In August 2016, the maternal grandmother and the maternal stepgrandfather filed a complaint in the trial court seeking an award of visitation with the children pursuant to Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3-4.2, which became effective on August 1, 2016.”
Howard v. McElrath (Ex parte McElrath), 258 So. 3d 364 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On that same date, the father filed a counterclaim requesting, among other things, an order declaring Alabama's Grandparent Visitation Act ("the GVA"), § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975, facially unconstitutional.”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(c)(2) — 2 cases
Schillaci v. Gentry (Ex parte Gentry), 238 So. 3d 66 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017).
“In August 2016, the maternal grandmother and the maternal stepgrandfather filed a complaint in the trial court seeking an award of visitation with the children pursuant to Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3-4.2, which became effective on August 1, 2016.”
Howard v. McElrath (Ex parte McElrath), 258 So. 3d 364 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On that same date, the father filed a counterclaim requesting, among other things, an order declaring Alabama's Grandparent Visitation Act ("the GVA"), § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975, facially unconstitutional.”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(d)(1) — 1 case
Schillaci v. Gentry (Ex parte Gentry), 238 So. 3d 66 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017).
“In August 2016, the maternal grandmother and the maternal stepgrandfather filed a complaint in the trial court seeking an award of visitation with the children pursuant to Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3-4.2, which became effective on August 1, 2016.”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(e) — 2 cases
Schillaci v. Gentry (Ex parte Gentry), 238 So. 3d 66 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017).
“In August 2016, the maternal grandmother and the maternal stepgrandfather filed a complaint in the trial court seeking an award of visitation with the children pursuant to Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3-4.2, which became effective on August 1, 2016.”
Howard v. McElrath (Ex parte McElrath), 258 So. 3d 364 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On that same date, the father filed a counterclaim requesting, among other things, an order declaring Alabama's Grandparent Visitation Act ("the GVA"), § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975, facially unconstitutional.”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(e)(2) — 1 case
Schillaci v. Gentry (Ex parte Gentry), 238 So. 3d 66 (Ala. Civ. App. 2017).
“In August 2016, the maternal grandmother and the maternal stepgrandfather filed a complaint in the trial court seeking an award of visitation with the children pursuant to Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3-4.2, which became effective on August 1, 2016.”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(f) — 2 cases
Steamships v. J.S. (In re J.S.), 263 So. 3d 728 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“The paternal grandmother insists that her request for visitation is not a request for grandparent visitation under Alabama's most recent grandparent-visitation statute, codified at Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3-4.2. Thus, we will not consider the mother's argument that, although the…”
Steamships v. J.S. (In re J.S.), 263 So. 3d 728 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“The paternal grandmother insists that her request for visitation is not a request for grandparent visitation under Alabama's most recent grandparent-visitation statute, codified at Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3-4.2. Thus, we will not consider the mother's argument that, although the…”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(g)(1) — 2 cases
S.B. v. K.J. (in Re K.j.), 266 So. 3d 753 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the grandmother filed a petition in the circuit court seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
S.B. v. K.J. (in Re K.j.), 266 So. 3d 753 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the grandmother filed a petition in the circuit court seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(i) — 2 cases
Bonner v. Jeter (Ex parte Jeter), 261 So. 3d 1219 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the maternal grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
Bonner v. Jeter (Ex parte Jeter), 261 So. 3d 1219 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the maternal grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(j) — 3 cases
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(k) — 2 cases
Bonner v. Jeter (Ex parte Jeter), 261 So. 3d 1219 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the maternal grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
Bonner v. Jeter (Ex parte Jeter), 261 So. 3d 1219 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the maternal grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(k)(2) — 2 cases
Bonner v. Jeter (Ex parte Jeter), 261 So. 3d 1219 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the maternal grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
Bonner v. Jeter (Ex parte Jeter), 261 So. 3d 1219 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the maternal grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
— Ala. Code § 30-3-4.2(n) — 2 cases
Bonner v. Jeter (Ex parte Jeter), 261 So. 3d 1219 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the maternal grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
Bonner v. Jeter (Ex parte Jeter), 261 So. 3d 1219 (Ala. Civ. App. 2018).
“On September 7, 2017, the maternal grandmother filed a petition seeking visitation with the child, pursuant to § 30-3-4.2, Ala. Code 1975 ("the Grandparent Visitation Act").”
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.