Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Ex parte Siderius

Supreme Court of Alabama
144 So.3d 319 (Ala. 2013)


Facts

Kenneth Fordham (plaintiff) and Caroline Siderius (defendant) were married and had two minor children, L.F. and M.F., in Alabama. The family then moved to Spokane, Washington, where the marriage deteriorated. Fordham and Siderius retained a court-approved mediator to craft a divorce-and-custody agreement. Thereafter, Fordham returned to live in Mobile, Alabama. Fordham and Siderius agreed that the children would travel to Mobile for a few weeks prior to the start of the new school year in Spokane. However, Fordham transferred the children’s school registration from Spokane to Mobile and filed a petition for divorce and child custody against Siderius in an Alabama court. Additionally, Fordham filed an emergency motion seeking immediate custody of the children, which the Alabama court granted. Siderius filed a petition in Spokane seeking dissolution of the marriage and custody of the children. The same day, the Spokane trial court issued an ex parte order requiring Fordham to return the children to Washington, scheduled hearings on Siderius’s petition, and conducted a telephone conference with the Mobile trial court as required by the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA). The Spokane court concluded that it had jurisdiction under the UCCJEA because the children lived with their parents in Washington for 17 months prior to the filing of the Alabama custody petition. The Mobile court held that it had jurisdiction over Siderius based upon her minimum contacts with the state. Siderius appealed and petitioned for a writ of mandamus with the Alabama court of appeals. The court of appeals denied Siderius relief, and the Supreme Court of Alabama granted certiorari to review.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Moore, C.J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.