Shackelford v. Shackelford, [Ms. 2210201, Aug. 5, 2022] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. Civ. App. 2022). The court (Moore, J.; Thompson, P.J., and Hanson and Fridy, JJ., concur; Edwards, J., concurs in the result) affirms the Tuscaloosa Circuit Court’s judgment denying the father’s motion to modify custody and to hold the mother in contempt. As to the contempt motion, the court declines to consider the merits of the father’s arguments:
[T]he trial court did not make specific findings of fact in its judgment, and the father did not challenge in his postjudgment motion the sufficiency of the evidence with respect to contempt. “[I]n a nonjury case in which the trial court makes no specific findings of fact, a party must move for a new trial or otherwise properly raise before the trial court the question relating to the sufficiency or weight of the evidence in order to preserve that question for appellate review.” New Props., L.L.C. v. Stewart, 905 So. 2d 797, 801-02 (Ala. 2004). Accordingly, we cannot consider the father’s argument on this issue.
Ms. **18-19.