FROM 25TH JDC, PARISH OF PLAQUEMINES NO. 61-134, DIVISION
"B" Honorable Michael D. Clement, Judge
MICHAEL HUFFT PIVACH, PIVACH, HUFFT, THRIFFILEY & DUNBAR,
L.L.C. COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS/APPELLEES
HOSKIN IN PROPER PERSON AS DEFENDANT/APPELLANT
composed of Chief Judge James F. McKay III, Judge Terri F.
Love, Judge Regina Bartholomew Woods
F. MCKAY III CHIEF JUDGE
child custody case, the defendant, Kilee Mignon Hoskin,
appeals the district court's granting of sole custody to
the plaintiff, Leonard Eugene Panaro. We affirm.
AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
of background, Leonard Panaro and Kilee Hoskin are the
biological parents of two minor children, both sons, thirteen
(13) and eleven (11) years of age. Mr. Panaro and Ms. Hoskin
were never married. Ms. Hoskin has a history of drug abuse
and incarceration and also suffers from a bi-polar disorder.
Bonnie Buras is Ms. Hoskin's mother and the grandmother
of the two minor children.
January 23, 2014, Leonard Panaro and Bonnie Buras filed a
petition for child custody with ex parte child
custody order. On January 24, 2014, the district court
awarded temporary joint custody to Mr. Panaro and Ms. Buras.
On February 13, 2014, the district court signed a consent
judgment continuing joint custody of the two minor children
with Mr. Panaro and Ms. Buras. The district court, on May 22,
2014, again continued the temporary joint custody of the
minor children with Mr. Panaro and Ms. Buras. The May 22,
2014 judgment also granted Ms. Hoskin unsupervised visitation
every other Saturday and Sunday from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
However, the judgment prohibited Ms. Hoskin's boyfriend
at that time, Kent Vaughn, from texting or being around the
children. This was followed by a consent judgment, rendered
by the district court on August 21, 2014, and signed on
December 2, 2014, which continued joint custody with Mr.
Panaro and Ms. Buras, but allowed Ms. Hoskin to now have the
children overnight on her Saturday visitations.
August 27, 2015, the district court signed a consent judgment
which granted temporary joint custody of the children to Mr.
Panaro and Ms. Hoskin, subject to a six month review by the
court. Also contained within this consent judgment was the
prohibition of Kent Vaughn having any contact with the two
October 22, 2015, Ms. Hoskin violated the district
court's August 27, 2015 judgment by allowing the two
minor children to be in the presence of Kent Vaughn and
travel in his vehicle. Thereafter, on October 23, 2015, Mr.
Panaro and Ms. Buras filed a motion for contempt and to
change child custody with an exparte order. The district
court signed the ex parte order awarding temporary
joint custody back to Mr. Panaro and Ms. Buras. At the same
time, Ms. Hoskin's attorney, Patrick Eskew, filed a
motion to withdraw, which the trial court granted.
October 27, 2015, Ms. Hoskin hired a new attorney, Taetrece
Harrison, who filed an answer and reconventional demand on
behalf of Ms. Hoskin. A trial regarding the ex parte
temporary custody order, signed on October 23, 2015, took
place on November 16, 2015. After hearing testimony from
several witnesses including Ms. Hoskin and Ms. Buras, the
court issued an order continuing the temporary joint custody
in favor of Mr. Panaro and Ms. Buras. Ms. Hoskin was granted
visitation to be exercised at the residence of Mr. Panaro.
The court again ordered that Kent Vaughn, who was now Ms.
Hoskin's husband, have no contact with the children. In
addition, the court appointed Julie C. Ruel, LPC to conduct a
detailed custody evaluation.
March 18, 2016, Mr. Panaro and Ms. Buras filed a second
motion for contempt with ex parte termination of
visitation, alleging that Ms. Hoskin again allowed Kent
Vaughn to be around the two minor children. The court then
held a status conference with counsel for both parties and
Ms. Hoskin. Following the status conference, the court signed
an order terminating Ms. Hoskin's visitation rights.
March 23, 2016, Mr. Panaro and Ms. Buras filed a motion for
injunction with implementation of parental guidelines. The
injunction dealt with alleged defamatory/derogatory comments
about Mr. Panaro and Ms. Buras that Ms. Hoskin posted on her
Facebook page, knowing that one of her sons had access to her
Facebook postings. This was followed by the withdrawal of Ms.
Harrison as counsel for Ms. ...