Russell v. Russell

In its opinion in this case, the Court of Civil Appeals acknowledged the standard *890adopted in Ex parte McLendon, 455 So.2d 863 (Ala.1984) — “ ‘the positive good brought about by the change in custody [must] more than offset the disruptive effect of uprooting the child,’ ” 19 So.3d at 884 — but asserted that cases after McLen-don have increased the burden of proof on noncustodial parents by stating that the McLendon standard is necessarily a “heavy” or “very heavy” burden requiring proof of an “overwhelming necessity for a change”:

“ ‘Subsequent cases have made the burden of the noncustodial…