Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Richard v. Richard
Citations: 386 So. 2d 141; 1980 La. App. LEXIS 4109Docket: No. 7661
Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal; June 25, 1980; Louisiana; State Appellate Court
Harold Richard appeals a District Court judgment that denied him custody of his minor child, Linda Christine, and mandated $500 monthly child support to his former wife, Shirley Richard. Following their divorce on April 12, 1976, Shirley was granted custody of their eight children, and Harold was ordered to pay $684.27 in child support. In 1979, Harold sought custody of the minor children and requested a reduction in support payments; Shirley countered with a demand for increased support and collection of past due payments totaling $1,613.91. After a trial, custody of one child, Mary Katherine, was granted to Harold, while past due support of $368.54 was made executory, and child support was reduced to $500 per month. Harold's appeal raises two issues: the denial of custody for Linda Christine and the exclusion of his mortgage payment from the child support calculation. The court emphasized that custody decisions are based on the child's best interests, as outlined in Civil Code Art. 157, and that prior custody is merely one factor among many. Although Linda had resided with Harold for 11 months before the trial, this was not deemed the sole determining factor for custody. Harold argued that Shirley's past marijuana use in the home negatively impacted Linda's welfare, supported by testimonies from older children regarding drug use. However, the court noted that Shirley took corrective actions upon discovering the issue, including dismissing her brother from the home and seeking supervision for her children during her absence. The judgment transferring custody of Mary Katherine remains intact, as Shirley did not appeal or respond to the appeal. Both parents, Mrs. Richard and Mr. Richard, are recognized as caring and capable of providing suitable homes for their child, Linda Christine. The trial judge determined that granting custody to Mrs. Richard was in the child's best interest, a decision that is upheld due to a lack of clear error in the record. In terms of child support, Mr. Richard was ordered to pay $684.27 monthly, which both parties treated as including $184.27 for the family home mortgage. An existing property settlement agreement clarified that Mr. Richard would continue to pay this mortgage in addition to a $500 monthly child support obligation. Mr. Richard contended that the trial judge erred by not explicitly stating that the child support amount included the mortgage payment, arguing that this oversight leaves his total obligation unchanged at $684.27. However, the court determined that the trial judge’s intent was clear and that Mr. Richard’s mortgage obligation is distinct from his child support payments, stemming from prior agreements. After reviewing the evidence regarding the children's needs and Mr. Richard's financial capabilities, the court found no abuse of discretion in the $500 support award. Consequently, the trial court's judgment is affirmed, with all costs charged to Mr. Richard.