Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Appellate Law Blogs -> Alabama Appellate Watch

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Appellate Law

: Alabama Appellate Watch

Trial Court Cannot Amend Judgment After 30 Days

ADVERTISEMENTS

In Capone v. Capone, [Ms. 2080147] (Ala. Civ. App. May 8, 2009), the Court of Civil Appeals reversed a trial court's amendment of a judgment made more than 30 days after the judgment because the trial court lacked jurisdiction to amend the judgment.

In Capone, the trial court entered a divorce judgment setting out certain obligations of the parties, including alimony, on March 26, 2007. On September 12, 2007, the former husband filed a petition to modify the alimony portion of the judgment, and the former wife counterclaimed for an increase in the alimony. After hearing and evidence, the trial court granted the wife's motion and increase the alimony obligation on July 23, 2008. In the order, the trial court stated that it had misinterpreted a prior ruling from another judge who previously had the case and inadvertently awarded the wife too little in the March 26 order. Thus, the trial court purported to correct its mistake and award a higher amount. The former husband filed a post-judgment motion and, after it was denied, appealed.

The Court of Civil Appeals first held that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to amend the prior order. The court noted that "a trial court generally loses jurisdiction to amend its judgment 30 days after entry of the judgment." Slip Op. p. 5. Rule 60(a), which allows for corrections due to clerical errors at any time, did not apply. The court found that the "the trial court was not merely correcting a clerical error but, instead, was 'mak[ing] the judgment say something other than what was originally pronounced.'" Slip Op. p. 7.

Finally, the court stated that a trial court has jurisdiction to amend a divorce judgment "based only on an intervening material change in circumstances . . . not an an earlier error committed in rendering the amended divorce judgment." Slip Op. p. 7. Here, no change in circumstances was cited by the trial court and, therefore, it could not amend the judgment.

Full post as published by Alabama Appellate Watch on May 15, 2009 (boomark / email).