Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Prevo v. Mosby

Court of Appeals of Louisiana, Second Circuit

November 3, 2017

SHARUNDA PREVO Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
MILTON MOSBY Defendant-Appellant

         Appealed from the Second Judicial District Court for the Parish of Claiborne, Louisiana Trial Court No. 39, 191 Honorable James Hugh Boddie, Jr., Judge Ad Hoc.

          MILTON MOSBY, SR. In Proper Person Appellant.

          LAW OFFICE OF ERNEST H. GILLIAM, III Counsel for Appellee.

          Before WILLIAMS, DREW, and BLEICH (Pro Tempore), JJ.

          DREW, J.

         In this child custody matter, the father appeals a judgment awarding joint custody, with the mother having domiciliary status. We affirm.

         FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         This is an appeal from a decision modifying the parties' respective child custody rights regarding their child, C.M. Milton Mosby and Sharunda Prevo apparently are the biological father and biological mother of two minor children - M.M. and C.M.

         On October 6, 2016, the parties filed protective orders against each other on behalf of C.M. Milton alleged that Sharunda was responsible for "kidnapping" C.M. while he was in Milton's legal custody. Sharunda alleged that Milton had kicked C.M. out of his house, leaving C.M. homeless until she took C.M. into her home.

         In ruling on these protective orders, the trial court modified the custody arrangement - by awarding joint custody, with domiciliary parent status awarded to Sharunda. The appellant was awarded "visitation" every other weekend. The previous custody arrangement had been more favorable to Milton, and was based in part on the fact that several years ago, Sharunda's former husband, Josh Vallo, raped M.M. As a result, Josh Vallo was convicted of aggravated incest in 2010.

         TRIAL COURT'S REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

         The trial court offered oral reasons for judgment. The court noted that its duty is to do what is in the best interest of the minor child, C.M.; it also found a substantial material change in circumstances based on several facts. First, Josh Vallo is no longer a threat to the children as he is now imprisoned. Second, the court specifically found C.M.'s testimony - that he wants to live with his mother - to be "credible, true and genuine." The court also found that CM., a 16-year-old, has "reached the age of reason, " and accorded substantial weight to C.M.'s preference. Third, the court also addressed problems that had occurred while the children were living with Milton, including the testimony of several witnesses that Milton had failed to pick up the children from the babysitter, and the children's testimony that Milton put CM. out of the house.

         APPELLANT'S ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR AND ARGUMENTS

         Milton was not represented by counsel in the lower court and is not represented by counsel on this appeal. He ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.