Nisesu E. Knighton v. James Knighton

Montgomery, Alabama family law lawyers presented the parties in a divorce involving minor childrne.



The parties, who are the parents of two minor children, Ez. K. and El. K. ("the children"), were apparently[1]divorced in September 2022 by a judgment of the trial court that awarded the parties, among other things, joint physical custody of the children on an alternating-week basis and certain property rights as to the parties' former marital home ("the residence"). The prevailing "week-on, week-off" custody arrangement as to the children seems to have remained in effect even after modification proceedings had taken place in the trial court, and the trial court appears to have issued another judgment or order in October 2023 (in case no. DR-21-900558.02) addressing certain mechanics of the eventual ultimate disposition of the residence.





MoreLaw's goal is to help people seeking legal assistance to find the best lawyers available to represent them in any county in the United States. Click the link above to see some lawyers available where this case was tried who might be available to represent you. Call 833-200-3094 if you need help finding a lawyer.

After an ore tenus proceeding, at which the father and the mother appeared pro se and gave testimony (including, as to the father's contempt claim regarding alleged custody violations, testimony regarding events occurring during the pendency of the action), the trial court entered a judgment declining to find the father in contempt, declining to find the mother in contempt as to her conduct regarding disposition of the residence (but warning the mother to cooperate "with all requirements for [its] listing and sale"), and finding the mother in contempt as to the father's claim that she infringed on the father's custodial rights; the mother was directed to pay a $500 fine within 30

days or be subject to arrest and incarceration. The mother, acting through counsel, filed a timely motion pursuant to Rule 59(e), Ala. R. Civ. P., challenging the trial court's judgment, which motion was denied after a hearing.



JUDGMENT VACATED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART; AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.