MARTIN J. DAVIES
JANET LABATUT DAVIES JANET LABATUT DAVIES
MARTIN J. DAVIES
FROM CIVIL DISTRICT COURT, ORLEANS PARISH NO. 2012-04553 C\W
2009-05534, DIVISION "H-12" Honorable Monique E.
Jennifer C. Carter de BLANC LAW FIRM, LLC COUNSEL FOR
M. Prados LOWE STEIN HOFFMAN ALLWEISS & HAUVER, L.L.P.
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLEE
composed of Judge Daniel L. Dysart, Judge Joy Cossich
Lobrano, Judge Dale N. Atkins)
L. DYSART JUDGE.
J. Davies appeals a judgment sustaining Janet Labatut
Davies' Exceptions of Prematurity and No Cause of Action,
which were filed in response to his Motion to Terminate Final
Periodic Spousal Support. Janet Labatut Davies answers the
appeal arguing that the trial court erred in granting Mr.
Davies' Motion to Terminate Payment of Health Insurance
Premium. She also requests that this Court address the ruling
of the trial court finding her Exception of Res
Judicata moot. For the reasons that follow, we amend the
judgment and affirm, as amended.
parties were married in 1989, and were divorced by a judgment
signed December 6, 2013. Two daughters were born of the
marriage, one of whom had reached majority at the time of the
subject hearing. On January 28, 2015, the parties entered
into two consent judgments. One judgment concerned support
for the parties' two children, spousal support, car
insurance and cellphones for the two children, tuition and
living expenses for college for both children, health
insurance for both children and Ms. Davies, and beneficiaries
on Mr. Davies' retirement accounts and life insurance.
The other judgment was relative to the partition of community
property, including sale of the family home, retirement
accounts, vehicles, movables in the family home, and debts.
January of 2017, the trial court heard several motions filed
by the parties. Specifically, Mr. Davies filed a Motion to
Enforce Consent Judgment Partitioning Community Property, and
a Motion to Modify Beneficiary Designation and to Reduce
Spousal Support, and to require that all reimbursement
requests submitted by Ms. Davies be submitted within thirty
days of payment. Ms. Davies filed a Rule for Contempt and
Exceptions of No Cause of Action and Res Judicata
regarding Mr. Davies' motions to modify spousal support
and beneficiary designation.
the hearing, two judgments were issued. The considered
judgment recognized that Ms. Davies was entitled to fifty
percent of Mr. Davies' Tulane University retirement funds
from the date of marriage until the date the petition for
divorce was filed. Additionally, a consent
judgment was entered into by the parties
recognizing that Mr. Davies was in contempt of the January
2017 judgment for failure to pay cell phone bills for his two
daughters, car insurance for his eldest daughter, and failure
to designate his two daughters as beneficiaries on his Tulane
retirement account. Mr. Davies was found not to be in
contempt for failure to pay the non-covered cost of his
eldest daughter's wisdom teeth extraction. Additionally,
Mr. Davies was ordered to pay Ms. Davies' court costs and
trial court also sustained Ms. Davies' Exception of No
Cause of Action regarding Mr. Davies' motion to modify
spousal support, and her Exception of Res Judicata
regarding his motion to modify beneficiaries on his Tulane
December of 2017, Mr. Davies filed a Motion to Terminate
Final Periodic Spousal Support and Payment of Health
Insurance Premium. Ms. Davies responded by filing Exceptions
of Prematurity, Res Judicata and No Cause of Action.
A hearing was held on February 28, 2018, and the judgment
from which this appeal arises was rendered on March 26, 2018.
In that judgment, the trial court sustained Ms. Davies'
Exceptions of No Cause of Action and Prematurity and held
that the granting of the other exceptions rendered the
Exception of Res Judicata moot. The trial court
overruled Ms. Davies' Exception of No Cause of Action as
to the motion to terminate payment of insurance
appeal and answer to appeal follow.
first assignment of error, Mr. Davies argues that the trial
court committed legal error by failing to interpret the
language of the January 2015 consent judgment in accordance
with Louisiana Civil Code art. 2050. His second assignment of
error relates to the ...