Cormier v. Cormier
112 So. 3d 1073
La. Ct. App.2013Background
- Brandon L. Cormier and Keri McGee Cormier (Carriere) married in 1998; one child, Parker, born of the marriage.
- Consent judgment (2004) awarded joint custody with Keri as primary domiciliary parent; Brandon received 10 days/month visitation and $350/month child support.
- In 2011, Brandon filed an ex parte petition to modify custody; Keri counter-petitioned on support, visitation, and contempt; temporary restraining order sought to restrict contact with Parker's mother’s boyfriend, which the court denied.
- A hearing officer recommended no change in custody and modest adjustments to child support; Parker’s credibility as a witness was acknowledged as an issue.
- Trial court upheld the hearing officer’s custody findings, found no material change in circumstances, and increased Keri’s child support to $1,000/month while ordering Brandon to cover private school expenses and keep Parker on his health insurance.
- The court remanded for a joint custody implementation order, finding no such order in the record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was a material change in circumstances warranting custody modification | Cormier asserts material change since consent judgment | Cormier argues no sufficient change to modify custody | No reversible abuse; custody unchanged; remanded for implementation order |
| Whether child support should be modified | Cormier challenges amount based on new salary claims | Keri seeks higher support reflecting income disparity; underemployment concerns noted | Trial court’s increase to $1,000/month affirmed; underemployment finding upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Hensgens v. Hensgens, 653 So.2d 48 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1995) (material-change standard for modification of consent custody judgments)
- Gremillion v. Gremillion, 966 So.2d 1228 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2007) (trial court’s custody determinations accord deference absent abuse of discretion)
- Hawthorne v. Hawthorne, 676 So.2d 619 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1996) (trial court best positioned to evaluate child's best interests; review narrow)
- Stelly v. Stelly, 820 So.2d 1270 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2002) (great discretion in child-support modifications; avoid abusive reversals)
- Rougeau v. Rougeau, 829 So.2d 1125 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2002) (standard for reviewing child-support decisions)