289 So.3d 1198
La. Ct. App.2020Background
- Heather Roper Kaptein (mother) and Jesse Kaptein (father) are divorced parents of one minor child; prior litigation produced an order granting the father virtual (FaceTime) visitation.
- Heather filed a Motion to Suspend FaceTime Visitation, arguing the father failed to comply with court orders and that a purely virtual relationship was not in the child’s best interests.
- Jesse opposed via an exception of res judicata, asserting the visitation issue had been litigated and decided previously.
- The trial court sustained Jesse’s res judicata exception and dismissed Heather’s motion; Heather appealed the ruling.
- The Fourth Circuit reversed, holding visitation orders are modifiable (not final) and res judicata did not bar Heather’s motion; the case was remanded for substantive consideration of changed circumstances.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether res judicata bars mother’s motion to suspend virtual visitation | Kaptein (mother): visitation modification request is permissible; prior visitation order is not final | Kaptein (father): prior judgment granting FaceTime visitation precludes re-litigation under res judicata | Court: Res judicata inapplicable because visitation judgments are modifiable and not final; trial court erred; reversed and remanded |
Key Cases Cited
- Myers v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of La., 43 So. 3d 207 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2010) (defines res judicata and final-judgment requirement)
- Kleiser v. Kleiser, 619 So. 2d 178 (La. App. 3 Cir. 1993) (custody and child-support judgments are subject to modification and not final)
- Hansel v. Hansel, 802 So. 2d 875 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2001) (recognizes modifiability of custody/visitation judgments)
- Hero v. Hero, 714 So. 2d 868 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1998) (grandparent visitation judgment held not final for res judicata purposes)