Alabama Supreme Court reverses 24 year old divorce law ruling

October 30, 2013

By Kyle Smith, Assistant Staff Writer

A recent state Supreme Court ruling in Alabama has dramatically changed divorce law in regard to child support.

The state of Alabama considered payment of college expenses a requirement of child support for divorced parents, and through the 1989 case Bayliss v. Bayliss, extended that requirement to non-custodial parents. Interestingly, Alabama has no law requiring married parents to pay for their children’s college expenses.

Critics of the Bayliss opinion sought to challenge it on two grounds: first, that the requirement violates Fourteenth Amendment equal protection because it is imposed on divorced parents only. Second, they maintain that the requirement to pay postminority support for a child was never authorized by the legislature.

Proponents of the law argue that children of divorced families are a disadvantaged class, and the government has an obligation to afford them as much protection as possible. Furthermore, divorce settlements often include child support into postminority years for the express purposes of education. The state of Alabama is one of three states where the age of majority is nineteen, so proponents claim that the expectation of child support should extend into college education.

The issue came to a header this month when a divorce case, Christopher v. Christopher, came before the Alabama Supreme Court. The conditions of Bayliss were effectively recreated within Christopher, but this time lower courts were bound by Supreme Court precedent.

In the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals opinion, judge Moore urges the state Supreme Court to overturn the Bayliss decision, but recognizes that the appeals court is bound by Supreme Court rulings. The lower court argues that the insertion of a requirement for postminority child support, which did not exist in the original statute, violates separation of powers. The decision states:

"Perhaps if [the court] were deciding the case for the first time, we would agree with the mother that only the legislature can authorize postminority educational support and that § 30–3–1 does not do so, but, as noted previously, “this court is bound by the decisions of our supreme court.” TenEyck, 885 So.2d at 158. Thus, we cannot reverse the trial court's judgment on this point."

The appeals court opinion was challenged at the Supreme Court this month. In the end, the Supreme Court found that the Bayliss decision does indeed violate the statutory provisions of the legislature. Bayliss, according to the court, ignores the common law age of majority, does not defer to the legislature's definition of the age of majority, and inserts mandates into law where it does not exist. The court made no decision on Fourteenth amendment grounds, however, and left open the question of equal protection.

The reversal did not come as a surprise to many. The controversial Bayliss decision had received heavy scrutiny and created one of the most controversial rules in Alabama divorce law. After the Christopher ruling, payments for college expenses from custodial and non-custodial parents will be entirely voluntary.

Footnotes

Alabama courts

---

Federal courts:

Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals • U.S. District Court: Northern District of Alabama, Middle District of Alabama, Southern District of Alabama • U.S. Bankruptcy Court: Northern District of Alabama, Middle District of Alabama, Southern District of Alabama

State courts:

Alabama Supreme Court • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals • Alabama Circuit Courts • Alabama District Courts • Alabama Juvenile Courts • Alabama Municipal Courts • Alabama Probate Courts • Alabama Small Claims Courts

State resources:

Courts in Alabama • Alabama judicial elections • Judicial selection in Alabama