Divorce Attorney Legal Series: Appealing a Child Custody Judgment

Gaydon v. Gaydon 36 So.3d 449 (La. App 2 Cir. 2010) is a Louisiana Second Circuit Court of Appeal case which involves the issue of child custody that is illustrative of the legal standard of review that your divorce attorney may consider when filing an appeal. The parties involved were married from May 2004 to July 2009. During the marriage, the wife adopted her husband’s son from a previous marriage. They also had a biological son who was an issue of the marriage. In August 2009, the wife filed for divorce from her husband seeking sole custody of both her biological child and adopted child. Id. at 36.

In argument for sole custody of both children, the wife claimed her husband suffered from substance abuse problems and a gambling addiction. Id. She also alleged that he physically abused her, been fired from his job, and committed an act of adultery. Id. As such, she asked the trial court to grant her husband restricted supervision of the children contingent upon his completion of substance abuse programs and that no overnight visitations be granted. Id.

Initially without a divorce attorney, the husband asserted that it was she who had the substance abuse problem. He claimed his wife was addicted to ambien. Id. He further claimed that she gambled her money away and blew excessive amounts of money on cosmetic products. Id. After acquiring a divorce attorney, the husband filed a rule to establish custody in which he sought to either be named domiciliary parent or be awarded equal shared custody of the children. Id. at 37.

The hearing record revealed the husband drank on the job, was arrested for DWI, and that he is on medications for anxiety and depression. Id. Although the husband alleges through his divorce attorney that he is now stable and recovered, his wife believes he is not stable and has began drinking and partying again. Id. at 38. At the conclusion of hearing, the judge awarded joint custody with the mother being the domiciliary parent. The father received custody every other week from Thursday-Sunday. Id. In its reasons for judgment, the trial court stated that the evidence showed that the father had an ‘on-again-off again alcoholic problem.’ Id. The trial judge stated that the mother was ‘impressive’ and the more stable of the two. Id. at 39.

As a result of the trial court’s ruling, the husband appealed to the Louisiana Court of Appeal for the Second Circuit. The Court thoroughly reviewed the record and restated the findings of the trial court in its statement of facts. The Court stated, “the trial court has vast discretion in deciding matters of child custody.” Id. citing Slaughter v. Slaughter, 1 So.3d 788 (La. App. 2 Cir. 2008). This discretion is derived from the court’s ‘eye-ball’ view which allows it to evaluate the credibility of the witnesses. Id. In making its ruling in this case, the court stated, “[o]ur review of the record reveals no manifest error in the trial court’s decision to make the mother the domiciliary parent.” Id. at 44.

So what does this mean for your case and to your divorce attorney counseling you? It means that the trial judge is the trier of fact and unless there is ‘manifest error’, the Court of Appeal is usually not going to disturb the trial court’s ruling. Hence, it is ever so more important to flesh out all of the issues at the trial level. Furthermore, it’s important to show compelling evidence that you should be awarded custody.

The above is simply information on the law, not legal advice. Will Beaumont is an attorney in New Orleans, La.