Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Langstaff v. Langstaff

Alabama Court of Civil Appeals

October 24, 2014

Quintus C. Langstaff
v.
Rebecca R. Langstaff

Released for Publication June 17, 2015.

Appeal from Lauderdale Circuit Court. (DR-06-576.01). Trial Judge: William F. Jackson.

For Appellant: Dinah P. Rhodes, Rhodes & Creech, Huntsville.

For Appellee: Sharon Hindman Hester, Hester & James, LLC, Russellville.

MOORE, Judge. Thompson, P.J., and Pittman, Thomas, and Donaldson, JJ., concur.

OPINION

Page 129

MOORE, Judge.

Quintus C. Langstaff (" the father" ) appeals from a final judgment entered by the Lauderdale Circuit Court (" the trial court" ) in favor of Rebecca R. Langstaff (" the mother" ). We affirm.

Background[1]

On August 31, 2011, the father filed a petition in the trial court seeking a judgment declaring his obligations to pay child support under a divorce judgment entered

Page 130

on October 31, 2006, which, in many respects, incorporated the parties' settlement agreement. The father asserted that the Lauderdale County Department of Human Resources had notified him that the mother was claiming an arrearage of $14,000 under the divorce judgment. The father sought a judgment declaring that his child-support obligation for the parties' older child had ceased when that child began attending college in August 2007 and that his obligation to pay child support for the parties' younger child had ceased during the time that the younger child had primarily resided with the father in 2010. The father further sought a judgment declaring that he did not owe the mother any child-support arrearage.

On July 3, 2012, the father filed a " motion for court to declare child support provisions of decree ambiguous," [2] along with a brief in support of that motion. The mother filed a responsive brief on October 5, 2012. On October 24, 2012, the trial court denied the motion. After a trial conducted on March 19, 2013, the trial court entered a final judgment in which the trial court determined that the divorce judgment unambiguously required the father to pay the mother $1,000 per month in child support until the younger child had become emancipated unless the court ordered otherwise. The trial court found that the father had failed to pay the required child support and that he owed an arrearage of $20,632.44, plus interest. The ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.