Ruston Berry Woolley v. Robert Woolley

STATE OF LOUISIANA |
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

RUSTON BERRY WOOLLEY NO. 2026 CW 0713
VERSUS

ROBERT WOOLLEY AUGUST 25, 2026
In Re: Ruston Berry Woolley, applying for supervisory writs,

Family Court in and for the Parish of East Baton
Rouge, No. 218,330.

BEFORE : McCLENDON, C.J., HESTER AND MILLER, JJ.

WRIT DENIED.
PMc
SMM

Hester, J., dissents and would grant the writ. I would
reverse the May 12, 2026 district court judgment denying Ruston
Woolley’s Exception of No Cause of Action. The stipulated
judgment between the parties specified the minor children would
remain in Catholic school barring a non-voluntary and
significant change in the financial circumstances of a parent.
The motion filed by Robert Woolley does not allege such a
change. A stipulated judgment is a bilateral contract between
the parties, and as such, constitutes the law between them.
Adams v. Adams, 39,424 (La. App. 2d Cir. 4/6/05), 899 So.2d 726,
730. The motion filed by Robert Woolley does not contain
sufficient allegations pursuant to the stipulated judgment
governing school choice to state a cause of action as to a
change of schools. Accordingly, I would deny the portion of the
motion which seeks a change in schools. I would remand this
matter to the district court to allow Robert Woolley an
opportunity to amend his motion, if he can, to remove the
grounds of the objection. La. Code Civ. P. art. 934.

(CQURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT