Summary
The Alabama Supreme Court reviews K.R.’s petition for a writ of mandamus arising from contested adoption proceedings. The court denies relief as untimely concerning the probate court’s interlocutory custody order but holds that the clerk improperly appointed J. Michael Druhan as a temporary probate judge. Because Druhan lacked authority to act, his orders are void, and the court grants the petition in part and issues the writ.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether K.R.'s mandamus challenge to the probate court's June 19, 2015, interlocutory custody order was timely.
- Whether the probate-court clerk had authority to appoint J. Michael Druhan as a temporary probate judge after Probate Judge Davis recused himself.
- Whether orders entered by Druhan without a proper appointment were void.
- Whether the Supreme Court needed to reach the merits of K.R.'s challenge to the gag order after determining that Druhan's orders were void.
Holdings
- A mandamus petition challenging an order in an adoption proceeding must be filed within the presumptively reasonable 14-day period applicable to an adoption appeal unless the petitioner provides a mandatory statement of good cause for delay. K.R.'s challenge, filed 62 days after the custody order, was untimely and was denied without consideration of the merits.
- A probate-court clerk lacks authority to appoint a temporary probate judge. After the elected probate judge recuses himself, appointment must be made by an authorized appointing authority, including the presiding judge of the circuit court under the applicable statutes and local act, or the Alabama Supreme Court under the circumstances specified by statute.
- Because Druhan was not properly appointed as temporary probate judge, he lacked authority and jurisdiction to enter orders in the adoption proceeding, and every order he entered was void.
- The court did not need to reach the merits of K.R.'s challenge to the gag order because the order was entered by Druhan, who lacked authority to act, and was therefore void in its entirety.
Key quotations
“As a result, Druhan was never properly appointed as a temporary probate judge. Accordingly, Druhan had no authority to enter the orders he entered, and any order entered by Druhan is void.” (at 1113)
“PETITION GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; WRIT ISSUED.” (at 1114)
Factual background
K.R. initially agreed to place her unborn child, E.R., for adoption by K.G.S. and signed a pre-birth consent after a confidential probate-court hearing explaining the consequences and withdrawal procedure. After E.R.'s birth, K.R. withdrew her consent and contested K.G.S.'s adoption petition, while the probate court awarded K.G.S. custody and later restricted the parties' public discussion of the proceedings. Probate Judge Davis recused himself because of his connection to Adoption Rocks, and the probate-court clerk purported to assign J. Michael Druhan as temporary probate judge without an appointment by the presiding circuit judge or the Alabama Supreme Court.
Procedural history
The Mobile Probate Court entered an interlocutory order awarding K.G.S. custody of E.R. and later assigned attorney J. Michael Druhan to act as temporary probate judge after Probate Judge Don Davis recused himself. Druhan denied K.R.'s recusal motion and refused to vacate the gag order. The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals dismissed or denied K.R.'s initial mandamus petition, and K.R. sought review in the Supreme Court of Alabama. The Supreme Court denied relief as to the June 19 custody order because the challenge was untimely, but granted relief concerning Druhan's appointment and held that his orders were void.
Remand instructions
Judge Davis was ordered to certify his inability to serve in the case to either the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court or the presiding judge of the Mobile Circuit Court, after which the proper appointing authority was to appoint a temporary probate judge. The petition was granted in part and denied in part, and the writ issued.