White v. White, [Ms. CL-2024-0081, Aug. 30, 2024] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. Civ. App. 2024). The court (Lewis, J.; Hanson and Fridy, JJ., concur; Moore, P.J., concurs specially, which Edwards, J., joins) dismisses the former husband’s appeal from the Lauderdale Circuit Court’s December 22, 2023 Corrected Judgment of Divorce as having been taken from a void judgment.
The circuit court entered a final judgment of divorce on January 31, 2023. On February 13, 2023, the former husband filed a postjudgment motion to alter, amend, or vacate or, in the alternative, for a new trial. The circuit court entered an order on February 15, 2023, stating only that the postjudgment motion was granted and set the motion for a hearing on September 5, 2023. Ms. **2-3. The court holds that “[b]ecause the trial court’s order did not state that the January 2023 judgment was vacated, that the husband’s request for alternative relief of a new trial was granted, or that the husband’s postjudgment motion was denied, it did not reflect the rendition of an order disposing of the postjudgment motion pursuant to Rule 59.1.” Ms. *7.
The court further holds “there are only two methods listed in Rule 59.1[, Ala. R. Civ. P.,] for extending the 90-day period: (1) the express consent of all parties to an extension of the 90-day period, [and] (2) the grant of an extension of time by an appellate court. However, neither method of extending time was invoked in this case.” Ibid., internal quotation marks and citations omitted. The court accordingly holds that the former husband’s postjudgment motion was denied by operation of law on May 15, 2023, and the circuit court had no jurisdiction to enter the December 22, 2023 Corrected Judgment of Divorce. Ms. *8.