DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, 283 So. 2d 226.

151 citing documents.

  • Johnson v. Johnson 357 So. 2d 69 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
    which held that a consent judgment of alimony is not subject to reduction unless a change of circumstances supporting reduction is proved.
  • Boisfontaine v. Boisfontaine 357 So. 2d 90 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
  • Blaine v. Smith 357 So. 2d 1380 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
    Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, La.1973, , rules that alimony fixed by consent may not be modified in the absence of a change in circumstances.
  • Loyacano v. Loyacano 358 So. 2d 304 La. 1978
  • Willis v. Willis 355 So. 2d 999 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1978
    the court held that, even if the C.C.
  • Distinguished White v. White 356 So. 2d 1023 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
  • Tablada v. Tablada 356 So. 2d 1031 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
    See Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, La., (1973).
  • Halcomb v. Halcomb 352 So. 2d 1013 La. 1977
  • Mancuso v. Mancuso 352 So. 2d 359 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1977
  • Vanier v. Vanier 344 So. 2d 1077 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1977
  • Meyers v. Meyers 344 So. 2d 451 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1977
  • Powell v. Powell 344 So. 2d 453 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
  • Wilson v. Wilson 342 So. 2d 1159 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
    The Supreme Court has also said that “maintenance” under Article 160, “while meaning primarily food, clothing and shelter, does include such items as reasonable and necessary transportation or automobile expenses, medical and drug expenses, utilities, household expenses, and the income tax liability generated by the alimony payments made to the former wife.”
  • Trahan v. Trahan 340 So. 2d 676 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
  • Ward v. Ward 339 So. 2d 839 La. 1976
    Frederic v. Frederic, La., (1974); Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, La., (1973); Hays v. Hays, 240 La.
  • Hartley v. Hartley 336 So. 2d 291 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    Because of the fact that the daughter is of the full age of majority, the wife is not the proper plaintiff to prosecute an action for her support
  • Daigle v. Daigle 339 So. 2d 1266 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    However, the Court recognized that: “Common sense dictates that the term ‘maintenance’, while meaning primarily food, clothing and shelter, does include such items as reasonable and necessary transportation or automobile expenses, medical and drug expenses, utilities, household expenses, and the income tax liability
  • Ducote v. Ducote 339 So. 2d 835 La. 1976
    In Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, La., (1973), this Court outlined the parameters of the term "maintenance."
  • Cole v. Cole 338 So. 2d 152 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1976
  • Woods v. Woods 338 So. 2d 178 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1976
  • Delchamps v. Clark 336 So. 2d 946 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    The correctness of the original fixing is not before us: however low it appear, Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, La.1973, , obliges us to consider only changes in circumstances occurring since the prior fixing.
  • Ward v. Ward 332 So. 2d 868 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
    [7] Frederic v. Frederic, La., ; Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, La., ; Hays v. Hays, 240 La.
  • Favrot v. Barnes 332 So. 2d 873 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
    We are opposed to either affirming or reversing the grant of alimony under the circumstances, in view of the rule that a change in circumstances must ordinarily be shown in order to change an alimony fixing, Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, La.1973, .
  • Ducote v. Ducote 331 So. 2d 133 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976
  • Crum v. Crum 330 So. 2d 925 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, La., (1973); , (La.App.
  • Ransonet v. Ransonet 326 So. 2d 509 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    The wife has appealed from the reduction, contending that there was no change in circumstances between the initial judgment, August 8, 1975, and the filing of the rule to decrease the payments three weeks later on August 27, 1975
  • Jordan v. Staples 325 So. 2d 629 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
    ” Under the facts contained in this record, we find no justification for increasing the award, and accordingly, we reduce the amount awarded to its original sum, that is $750.00 per month.
  • Kent v. Kent 323 So. 2d 817 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
    art. 160 is based primarily on needs for food, clothing and shelter, but also includes *819 “such items as reasonable and necessary transportation or automobile expenses, medical and drug expenses, utilities, household expenses, and the income tax liability generated by the alimony payments made to the former wife.” Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, La., (1973).
  • Miller v. Miller 321 So. 2d 318 La. 1975
  • Ferrara v. Ferrara 320 So. 2d 287 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
  • Fisher v. Fisher 320 So. 2d 326 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
  • Swider v. Swider 314 So. 2d 372 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1975
    When alimony has been fixed by consent judgment, a change in amount can only be obtained by showing a subsequent change in circumstances; Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, La.1973, .
  • Perry v. Perry 319 So. 2d 479 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
    the Supreme Court defined “maintenance” to be much broader than merely food, clothing and shelter and gave this term a more realistic meaning to include the reasonable living and household expenses of the wife claiming alimony under Article 160.
  • Mendoza v. Mendoza 310 So. 2d 154 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1975
    art. 160's "support" includes more than food, clothing and shelter, Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, La.1973, , but not reeducation for another career of a person already educated for one career.
  • O'Brien v. O'Brien 308 So. 2d 333 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
    In Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, La., , the Court held that a "consent" alimony decree in a judgment of divorce evidenced the fact that the wife was free from fault in that her insufficient means of support were proven to the satisfaction of the Court rendering the judgment.
  • Distinguished Hastings v. Dinning 308 So. 2d 451 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
    We distinguished Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, La., (1973), which is relied on by defendant, on the grounds that Bernhardt held only that the mother has no right of action to sue for child support which becomes due after the child reaches the age of majority.
  • Gennaro v. Gennaro 306 So. 2d 756 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1975
  • Bryant v. Bryant 310 So. 2d 648 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
    The word "maintenance" as follows: "...
  • Vignes v. Vignes 311 So. 2d 615 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
  • Naughton v. Naughton 304 So. 2d 679 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1974
    1973, (so construing C.C.
  • Hughes v. Hughes 303 So. 2d 766 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
    said that as permanent alimony, a divorced wife is entitled to "maintenance."
  • Vetter v. Vetter 299 So. 2d 899 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1974
  • Manuel v. Broderson 298 So. 2d 333 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
    The husband relies first on the rule that a wife, demanding an increase in child support previously awarded, must prove a change in either the needs of the child or the income of the father, and that this applies even though the initial support decree was by consent of the parties, Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, La., (1973).
  • Chandler v. Chandler 297 So. 2d 257 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
  • Laiche v. Laiche 289 So. 2d 277 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
  • Burks v. Burks 293 So. 2d 923 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1974
    See Louisiana Civil Code Article 37; Bernhardt v. Bernhardt (La.1973) ; Jackson v. Jackson (La.App.
  • Williams v. Williams 294 So. 2d 916 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
    “This alimony shall be revoked if it becomes unnecessary, and terminates if the wife remarries.” ohr Supreme Court discussed LSA-C.C.
  • Newman v. Newman 293 So. 2d 565 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
    After the district judge decided the present case
  • Griffith v. Griffith 286 So. 2d 671 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1974
  • Eaglin v. Eaglin 306 So. 2d 375 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
    Article 227, ceases when the child reaches the age of majority, Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, La., (1973); (La.App.