DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Mills v. Wilkerson, 785 So. 2d 69.

20 citing documents.

  • Susana F. Moody v. Ross Moody La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
    5th Cir.12/16/98), Mills v. Wilkerson, 34,694 (La.App.2d Cir.3/26/01)
  • Billie Cook v. Sharon Sullivan La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2020
  • Tracie F. v. Francisco D. 174 So. 3d 781 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
    2 Cir. 3/26/01); ; Willis v. Duck, 98-1898 (La.App.
  • Ramirez v. Ramirez 124 So. 3d 8 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    2 Cir. 3/26/01), ( (La.App.
  • Bowden v. Brown 114 So. 3d 1194 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
    Mills v. Wilkerson, 34,694 (La.App.2d Cir.3/26/01), .
  • Caples v. Caples 103 So. 3d 437 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
    Louisiana Civil Code requires that “the best interest of the child [be] the *443 guiding principle in all child custody litigation.” Street v. May, 35,589 (La.App.2d Cir.12/5/01), ; Mills v. Wilkerson, 34,694 (La.App.2d Cir.3/26/01), ; La.
  • Willhite v. Willhite 17 So. 3d 495 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
  • Jones v. Coleman 18 So. 3d 153 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    2d Cir.3/26/01), , (La.App.
  • Kimberly Corianne Black, Etc. v. Kimberly Renae Simms La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    2 Cir. 3/26/01), the court held that substantial harm “includes parental unfitness, neglect, 2 At the time of the trial, Sheri Black was receiving treatment for cancer.
  • Black v. Simms 12 So. 3d 1140 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    2 Cir. 3/26/01), , the court held that substantial harm "includes parental unfitness, neglect, abuse, abandonment of rights, and is broad enough to include `any other circumstances, such as prolonged separation of the child from its natural parents, that would cause the child to suffer substantial harm.'" In an initial custody dis
  • Teague v. Teague 999 So. 2d 86 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
    Street v. May, 35,589 (La.App.2d Cir.12/5/01), ; Mills v. Wilkerson, *95 34,694 (La.App.2d Cir.3/26/01), .
  • Cook v. Cook 920 So. 2d 981 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
    Mills v. Wilkerson, 34,694 (La.App.2d Cir.3/26/01), .
  • Blackshire v. Washington 880 So. 2d 988 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
    The plaintiffs assert that the trial court should have applied the reasoning of Mills v. Wilkerson, 34,694 (La.App.2d Cir.3/26/01), , to this case.
  • Brown v. Brown 877 So. 2d 1228 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
  • Muller v. Muller 836 So. 2d 532 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
  • Lamp v. Lamp 833 So. 2d 1224 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    art. 133; Mills v. Wilkerson, 34,694 (La.App.2d Cir.3/26/01), .
  • Gaskin v. Henry 830 So. 2d 471 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    See Mills v. Wilkerson, 34,694 (La.App.2d Cir.03/26/01), ; Sporl v. Sporl, 00-1321 (La.App.
  • Hodnett v. Hodnett 827 So. 2d 1205 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    5th Cir.12/16/98), ; Mills v. Wilkerson, 34,694 (La.App.2d Cir.3/26/01), .
  • Myles v. Moore 827 So. 2d 516 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    Street, supra; Mills v. Wilkerson, 34,694 (La.App.2d Cir.3/26/01), ; Tennessee v. Campbell, 28,823 (La.App.2d Cir.10/30/96), .
  • Street v. May 803 So. 2d 312 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001