G.M.B. v. J.J.B.

── G.M.B. v. J.J.B. ── Court: Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama Date: May 15, 2026 Author: Bowden Category: General Rel: May 15, 2026 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate Courts, 300 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36104-3741 ((334) 229-0650), of any typographical or other errors, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is published in Southern Reporter. ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OCTOBER TERM, 2025-2026 _________________________ CL-2025-0545 _________________________ G.M.B. v. J.J.B. Appeal from Chilton Circuit Court (CV-24-900136) BOWDEN, Judge. G.M.B. ("the husband") appeals from two orders of the Chilton Circuit Court ("the circuit court"), the first denying the husband's motion for the circuit-court judge to recuse himself and the second finding the CL-2025-0545 husband in contempt for violating a temporary protection-from-abuse order and awarding attorney's fees to J.J.B. ("the wife"). Procedural History On July 8, 2024, the wife filed a petition for a protection-from-abuse order against the husband, which commenced a protection-from-abuse action ("the PFA action"). See Alabama Protection from Abuse Act ("the PFA Act"), See Ala. Code 1975, § 30-5-1 et seq. In her petition, the wife stated that the parties were married on October 19, 2019. She alleged that the husband had made her fear that she would be seriously injured and that he had engaged in reckless conduct that risked injury to her. She also alleged specifically that, on February 8, 2024, the husband had kicked in their bedroom door and had shaken and shoved her and that, on July 3, 2024, the husband had pushed her. The wife also stated that the husband was following her. On July 9, 2024, the circuit court set the PFA action for a hearing and entered an ex parte protective order ("the PFA order") barring the husband from any contact with the wife until further order of the court. On August 26, 2024, the husband filed a motion to set aside the PFA order and to dismiss the PFA action. On September 5, 2024, the husband 2 CL-2025-0545 filed an amended motion to set aside the PFA order and to dismiss the PFA action. In his amended motion, the husband argued that he had not been served with a signed copy of the wife's petition and that the petition had not been signed at all. On September 6, 2024, the husband filed a motion to consolidate the PFA action with an action initiated by the wife for a divorce from the husband, which had been assigned case number DR-24-900093 ("the divorce action")1. On September 6, 2024, the wife filed a response to the husband's motions to set aside the PFA order and to dismiss the PFA action. In her response, the wife asserted that the husband had been aware of the petition and had multiple copies of it, that she needed the PFA order to stay in place for her personal safety, and that she had signed her petition when it was filed. On September 10, 2024, the circuit court entered an order consolidating the PFA action and the divorce action. On September 12, 2024, the circuit court entered an order that stated that the husband had been served an unsigned copy of the petition for protection from abuse 1The husband appeals only from orders entered in the PFA action. He does not appeal from any order entered in the divorce action. 3 CL-2025-0545 but that the petition had been subsequently signed. The circuit court also left the PFA order in place, rese