Ex parte Karen Robertson Mundi; (In re: Karen Lee Robertson (Mundi)
Eric Bradford Robertson)
Released for Publication April 13, 2015.
(Jefferson Circuit Court, DR-07-1211.03). Dorothea Batiste, Trial Judge.
For Petitioner: E. Stanton " Bill" Burns III of Burns Legal & Political Affairs, Remlap.
For Respondent: William G. Barnes, Pinson.
THOMAS, Judge. Thompson, P.J., and Pittman, Moore, and Donaldson, JJ., concur.
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Karen Robertson Mundi (" the former wife" ) seeks mandamus review of the order of the Jefferson Circuit Court (" the trial court" ) denying her motion to transfer this action from the trial court to the Blount Circuit Court. The allegations in the petition for the writ of mandamus indicate the following. The former wife and Eric Bradford Robertson (" the former husband" ) were divorced by the trial court in 2007; the former wife was awarded sole physical custody of the parties' minor children. Shortly thereafter, the former wife moved with the minor children to Blount County. On February 12, 2014, the former husband filed in the trial court a petition to show cause in which he alleged that the former wife had interfered with his visitation with the minor children. The former wife filed an answer to the petition to show cause on March 17, 2014; on April 1, 2014, she then filed a response to the former husband's motion to set the case for trial and a motion to transfer the action to the Blount Circuit Court pursuant to § 30-3-5, Ala. Code 1975. On June 9, 2014, the former wife amended her answer to include the defense of improper venue. The materials submitted for our review indicate that the trial court held a hearing on April 29, 2014, and that, on July 18, 2014, it entered an order that, among other things, denied the former wife's motion
to transfer. The former wife filed this petition for a writ of mandamus on July 1, 2014.
We first note that
" [a] petition for the writ of mandamus is the appropriate means by which to challenge a trial court's order regarding a change of venue.
Ex parte Sawyer,892 So.2d 898, 901 (Ala. 2004). The writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy; it will not be issued unless the petitioner shows '" '(1) a clear legal right in the petitioner to the order sought; (2) an imperative duty upon the respondent to perform, accompanied by a refusal to do so; (3) the lack of another adequate remedy; and (4) properly invoked jurisdiction of the court.'" ' Ex parte Inverness Constr. Co., 775 So.2d 153, 156 ...