Russell Maurice Brue v. Le Tu Train Brue

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

RUSSELL MAURICE BRUE NO. 2025 CW 0562

VERSUS

LE TU TRAN BRUE SEPTEMBER 8, 2025

In Re: Le Tu Tran Brue, applying for supervisory writs, 22nd
Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Tammany, No.
202215936.

BEFORE : LANIER, WOLFE, AND HESTER, JJ.
WRIT DENIED.

WIL
CHH

Wolfe, J., dissents and would grant the writ and reverse the
portion of the district court’s April 23, 2025 judgment ordering
the children to attend St. Tammany public schools beginning in the
2025-2026 school year. La. R.S. 9:335(B) (3) provides in pertinent
part that “{a]Jll major decisions made by the domiciliary parent
concerning the child shall be subject to review by the court upon
motion of the other parent. It shall be presumed that all major
decisions made by the domiciliary parent are in the best interest
of the child.” “The burden of proving they are in fact not in the
best interest of the child is placed on the nondomiciliary parent
who opposes the decision.” Lawson v. Lawson, 48,296 (La. App. 2d
Cir. 7/24/13), 121 So.3d 769, 773. In this matter, defendant, Le
Tu Tran Brue, was designated as the domiciliary parent. I find
the district court abused its discretion because it did not apply
the proper presumption to the domiciliary parent’s decision as to
school choice, and plaintiff, Russell Maurice Brue, failed to meet
his burden to show the domiciliary parent’s decision was not in
the children’s best interest.

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

CLERK OF COURT
FOR THE COURT