Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

916 So. 2d 622

C.L. v. D.H.

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Decided June 17, 2005

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama · decided 2005-06-17

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently July 2018

19 state decisions

Relies on Ex Parte JP

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2005-06-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

THOMPSON, Judge,

¶1concurring specially.

¶2I write specially to remind the bench and bar that “temporary custody is actually permanent custody subject to change.... Semantically, [it] would be simpler if all courts declined to use the phrase ‘temporary custody’ and simply used ‘pendente lite’ or ‘custody’ as the circumstances require.” Ex parte J.P., 641 So.2d 276, 278 (Ala.1994).

/916/so2d/622 · .json · Public domain