in which a child is alleged to be ... dependent....” Former § 12 — 15—52(c)(1), Ala.Code 1975, required a petition alleging dependency to “set forth with specificity ... the facts constituting the dependency ... and that the child is in need of supervision, treatment, rehabilitation, care or the protection of the state.... ” In the present case, the father filed a petition alleging that the child was dependent; however, the only assertions made by the father purporting to evidence the child’s dependency were that “[cjusto-dy, visitation, and child support need[ed] to be established for the m rt erred in transferring custody of allegedly dependent child without holding evidentiary hearing to ascertain dependency of child); C.D.S. v. K.S.S., [963 So.2d 125 (Ala.Civ.App.2007) ] (<HOLDING>); and E.H. v. N.L., 992 So.2d 740
holding that when evidence did not prove dependency of child as alleged in complaint but revealed pure custody dispute juvenile court was without jurisdiction to determine custody of child holding that juvenile court never assumed jurisdiction to determine issue of custody of child when evidence revealed that there was no emergency situation rendering the child dependent as al leged in mothers petition holding that juvenile court that had never declared child dependent had no jurisdiction to enter order affecting visitation rights of father holding that juvenile court that determined child was not dependent had no jurisdiction to thereafter determine custody of child holding that once juvenile court found children dependent it had exclusive jurisdiction to determine their custody