Shanika Edmond v. Dominique Edmond, 2023CU1270

Shanika Edmond and Dominique Edmond have engaged in extended custody litigation regarding their child, J.E., since 2015, involving multiple stipulated joint custody judgments and litigation over modifications, contempt, and protection from abuse.
The Family Court previously dismissed Shanika’s petitions for protection from abuse, finding insufficient evidence of abuse by Dominique.
In December 2020, the Family Court entered a joint custody arrangement without a domiciliary parent and found Shanika in contempt for attempting to alienate J.E. from Dominique.
Shanika later filed to modify custody, alleging J.E.'s mental health problems and trauma from being reunited with Dominique constituted a change in circumstances.
Dominique responded with exceptions of res judicata and no cause of action, asserting these issues had already been litigated or should have been raised earlier.
The Family Court sustained Dominique’s exceptions and dismissed Shanika’s motions to modify custody and for a Watermeier hearing. Shanika appealed this dismissal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether res judicata bars the motion to modify custody	Custody judgments are not final, new facts exist	Issues were previously litigated	Res judicata applies, bars relitigation of same issues
Whether the motion stated a cause of action	Alleged change in circumstances due to child’s health	No material change alleged	Not addressed, issue moot due to res judicata finding
Whether Family Court erred by not considering new evidence	New mental health evidence not previously presented	New facts not meaningfully different	Record insufficient; presumption of correctness applies
Whether Family Court should have granted Watermeier hearing	Court should directly assess child’s custodial wishes	Issues mooted by res judicata	Dismissed as moot, based on res judicata

Bergeron v. Bergeron, 492 So.2d 1193 (La. 1986) (sets standard for modifying considered custody decrees—material change in circumstances and best interests of the child)
Global Marketing Solutions, L.L.C. v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc., 286 So.3d 1054 (La. App. 1st Cir. 2019) (explains Louisiana's res judicata doctrine including claim and issue preclusion)