Benoit v. Benoit
91 So. 3d 1015
La. Ct. App.2012Background
- Married 2000; petition for divorce and community partition under La. R.S. 9:2801; final divorce 2006.
- Partition trial held Jan 5, 2010; reasons Feb 8, 2010; judgment Apr 8, 2010; both parties appealed; judgment vacated on review.
- 1181 Clipper Drive was acquired pre-marriage; held in indivisión; not community property; governed by Civil Code on co-ownership (arts. 707-811) and requires partition by sale or in kind.
- Insurance proceeds from Katrina valued at $170,577.62; two payments already divided; court valuation supported.
- Capital One line of credit and other post-termination charges involved in reimbursement; 2009 amendment to Art. 2365 found substantive; equalization payment remanded for reconsideration.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 1181 Clipper Drive is community property. | Tammy; home erroneously treated as community. | Record proves indivisión ownership. | Not community; partition by sale or in kind under Civil Code. |
| Appropriate valuation of Katrina insurance proceeds. | Value agreed; exclusions for prior payments unclear. | Valuation reasonably supported by record. | Valuation upheld; no abuse of discretion. |
| Whether separate funds used to satisfy community obligations require reimbursement. | Troy entitled to reimbursement for payments. | Community funds mixed; reimbursement limited. | Court erred in some allocations; Troy entitled to reimbursement for several items (mortgage, taxes, etc.) but not all; specific adjustments affirmed. |
| Effect of 2009 amendment to La. C.C. art. 2365 on post-termination reimbursements. | Amendment retroactive; limits reimbursements after termination. | Amendment governs post-termination rights. | Amendment substantive; not retroactive; Troy owed reimbursement prior to amendment (truck note) and remanded for calculation. |
| Rental use and occupancy and related rental liability under La. R.S. 9:374. | Tammy claimed rental right for Troy's occupancy. | Tammy failed to preserve rental issue. | Tammy did not preserve under 9:374(C); no rental liability; however, equalization remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- Clemons v. Clemons, 960 So.2d 1068 (La. App. 2nd Cir. (2007)) (abuse of discretion standard in asset valuation; not specifying details)
- Hoover v. Hoover, 62 So.3d 765 (La. App. 1st Cir. (2011)) (standard for partition under RS 9:2801)
- Williams v. Williams, 509 So.2d 77 (La. App. 1st Cir. (1987)) (pre- amendment understanding of reimbursement rights)
- Granger v. Granger, 722 So.2d 107 (La. App. 3rd Cir. (1998)) (separate funds not automatically commingled; identification matters)
- Lupberger v. Lupberger, 805 So.2d 264 (La. App. 4th Cir. (2001)) (mortgage as community obligation; reimbursement framework)