from Limestone Juvenile Court. (JU-09-160.02).
Judge. Pittman, Thomas, and Donaldson, JJ., concur. Thompson,
P.J., concurs specially.
On Application for Rehearing
court's opinion issued on August 8, 2014, is withdrawn,
and the following is substituted therefor.
Limestone County Department of Human Resources ("
DHR" ) appeals from a judgment of the Limestone Juvenile
Court (" the juvenile court" ) awarding custody of
D.R. (" the child" ) to DHR. We affirm.
October 17, 2013, the child's paternal grandparents, J.R.
and L.R. (" the grandparents" ), filed a petition
alleging that the child was dependent. The juvenile court
appointed Deborah Long as the guardian ad litem for the
child. After a hearing, the juvenile court entered an order
on November 6, 2013, finding the child dependent, awarding
temporary legal and physical custody of the child to the
grandparents, setting a dispositional and permanency hearing
for January 17, 2014, and ordering DHR to complete a home
study of the grandparents' home. DHR submitted a report
of the home study it had conducted on January 14, 2014,
recommending that, if they desired custody, the grandparents
be awarded custody of the child. The January 2014 hearing was
continued until February 7, 2014.
January 17, 2014, the guardian ad litem filed a motion to
transfer custody, alleging that the grandparents had told her
on January 16, 2014, that they were no longer willing or able
to maintain custody of the child, that the child had been
" admitted to Mountain View[, a psychiatric hospital,]
for an assessment and services," and that the child
would be discharged in five days with no place to go. The
guardian ad litem also alleged that DHR's employees had
been contacted and had stated that a dependency petition must
be filed. The guardian ad litem asserted that she had
responded by informing DHR that there was an ongoing
dependency case pending in the juvenile court, i.e., the
present action. The guardian ad litem requested that a
hearing be held and that
custody of the child be placed with DHR or some other viable
January 21, 2014, the juvenile court entered a judgment
placing custody of the child with DHR and noting that the
matter had been set for a hearing on February 7, 2014. On
January 22, 2014, an attorney for DHR filed an appearance in
the dependency action. On January 24, 2014, DHR filed a
" motion to alter, amend, or vacate" the juvenile
court's January 21, 2014, judgment, alleging that its
due-process rights had been violated because it had not been
given notice or an opportunity to heard on the motion to
transfer custody that had been filed by the guardian ad
litem. DHR requested a hearing on its motion. On January 28,
2014, the juvenile court entered an order denying DHR's
motion to alter, amend, or vacate.
February 6, 2014, the guardian ad litem filed a motion
seeking review of the case; she alleged that the child had
been discharged from Mountain View but that both the
grandparents and DHR had refused to pick up the child upon
his release. The juvenile court held a hearing on February 7,
2014. On February 10, 2014, DHR filed a petition for a writ
of mandamus or, in the alternative, a notice of appeal
directed to the January 21, 2014, judgment and the January
28, 2014, order denying its motion to alter, amend, or vacate