197 So. 3d 332
La. Ct. App.2016Background
- Michelle Albitar filed for divorce in St. Charles Parish on June 25, 2015, seeking divorce, interim spousal and child support, exclusive use of a vehicle, injunctive relief, and sole custody of the minor child.
- Defendant Zouhair Albitar resided outside the U.S. (Saudi Arabia); a curator ad hoc was appointed and service was made on the curator; defendant’s counsel later sought a limited appearance to contest jurisdiction.
- Defendant filed multiple exceptions asserting lack of personal and subject-matter jurisdiction (including UCCJEA home-state challenge) and challenged service; he introduced purported Saudi documents; plaintiff introduced Louisiana driver’s license, voter registration, declarations of intent to change domicile, and school residency verification.
- The trial court denied defendant’s exceptions, proceeded with a default-style hearing when defense counsel limited participation, and entered judgments awarding custody to plaintiff and support and injunctive relief; notice-of-judgment mailing and appeal timing issues followed.
- The trial court’s written judgment was initially labeled “interim”; appellate procedural review found defendant had actual notice by Nov. 20, 2015 and his subsequent appeal was timely; a consent judgment entered during the pending appeal was held null.
- On the merits, the court found plaintiff was domiciled in St. Charles Parish (domicile evidence: driver’s license, voter registration, declarations of intent, testimony) and that Louisiana was the child’s home state under the UCCJEA; the court also found personal jurisdiction over defendant under due-process/long-arm analysis and affirmed the default proceedings were a strategic choice by defense counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject-matter jurisdiction over divorce (domicile/venue) | Michelle: domiciled in St. Charles Parish since mid-2014 (driver’s license, voter registration, declarations) | Zouhair: plaintiff (and child) were domiciliaries of Saudi Arabia; declarations were manufactured to create jurisdiction | Court held plaintiff had domiciled in St. Charles Parish before filing; Louisiana had jurisdiction over the divorce |
| Personal jurisdiction for ancillary support orders | Michelle: defendant had sufficient contacts with Louisiana (marriage in New Orleans, mail directed to LA address, joint tax preparer in Metairie) | Zouhair: resident abroad; contesting long-arm jurisdiction for personal obligations | Court held defendant had minimum contacts and asserting jurisdiction was consistent with fair play and substantial justice |
| Jurisdiction over custody under UCCJEA (home-state) | Michelle: child lived in LA/Texas; lived in Louisiana >6 consecutive months before proceedings; absences were temporary | Zouhair: child’s home state was Saudi Arabia; Saudi documents show child lived there | Court held Louisiana was child’s home state (child lived in LA >12 months; temporary absences); UCCJEA jurisdiction proper in Louisiana |
| Trial proceeded after limited-appearance counsel refrained from defending merits | Michelle: trial court proceeded after warning counsel that participation would waive limited appearance; plaintiff proceeded with testimony | Zouhair: counsel sought to preserve jurisdictional objections and not enroll; court effectively forced default | Court held counsel made a strategic choice; warning was proper; remaining silent preserved exceptions but allowed default hearing—no error in proceeding |
Key Cases Cited
- Jurado v. Brashear, 782 So.2d 575 (La. 2001) (requirement that court have personal or other statutory basis for jurisdiction in every civil case)
- International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (U.S. 1945) (minimum contacts test for personal jurisdiction)
- Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462 (U.S. 1985) (purposeful availment and foreseeability of being haled into court)
- Stobart v. State through DOTD, 617 So.2d 880 (La. 1993) (appellate review of factual findings—manifest error/clearly wrong standard)
- Rosell v. ESCO, 649 So.2d 840 (La. 1994) (appellate deference to trial court factual credibility assessments)
- Fox v. Board of Supervisors of Louisiana State Univ., 576 So.2d 978 (La. 1991) (Louisiana long-arm statute interpreted as coextensive with due process)
- Ruckstuhl v. Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp., 731 So.2d 881 (La. 1999) (defining purposeful availment and contacts analysis)
- Stelluto v. Stelluto, 914 So.2d 34 (La. 2005) (UCCJEA/UCCJA principles: forum with closest connection and substantial evidence should decide custody)