filed written consents with the court of this state for a tribunal of another state to modify the order and assume continuing, exclusive jurisdiction.” Ala.Code 1975, § 30-3A-205(a). The Official Comment to UIFSA § 205 states that, “if all the relevant persons — the obligor, the individual obligee, and the child — have permanently left the issuing state, the issuing state no longer has an appropriate nexus with the parties or child to justify exercise of jurisdiction to modify”; further, “the issuing tribunal has no current information about the factual circumstances of anyone involved, and the taxpayers of that state have no reason to expend public funds on the process.” Ala. Code 1975, § 30-3A-205, Official Comment; accord Lattimore v. Lattimore, 991 So.2d 239, 243 (Ala.Civ.App.2008) (<HOLDING>). In this case, unlike in Lattimore (in which
holding in part that a change in the mothers income that occurred after the trial was new evidence and that when a party has new evidence related to his or her income he or she may be entitled to a modification of a childsupport obligation if he or she files a petition to modify however because the mother had filed a postjudgment motion rather than a petition to modify her childsupport obligation her request to modify child support was not properly before the trial court holding that arkansass version of the uifsa applied to registration and modification of foreign childsupport order even though father mother and child resided in state holding that the scope of the receivers authority prescribed in the order of his appointment cannot be questioned in another tribunal unless the order or decree was void holding that under uifsa alabama courts may modify an alabama childsupport order only if the obligor the obligee or the concerned child affected by that order reside in the state and all the parties who are individuals have not filed written consent for the tribunal of another state to exercise jurisdiction over the childsupport order holding that once a support order is established the issuing court retains continuing exclusive jurisdiction under la chcode art 13025a 1 until the obligor the individual obligee and the child all establish a residence outside of the issuing state or 2 until all consent in writing to assumption of continuing exclusive jurisdiction by another state or 3 until the court of another state modifies the order of the issuing state in accordance with uifsa