Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Fulmer v. Fulmer, 301 So. 2d 622.

51 citing documents.

Caldwell v. Caldwell 672 So. 2d 944 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
Kelly v. Kelly 596 So. 2d 286 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
The Lagars court continued: " the wife obtained a judicial separation based on the husband's fault (abandonment), and the husband obtained a divorce on a no-fault basis, by reason of the expiration of the statutory period following judicial separation, without reconciliation, under La.R.S.
Hackett v. Hackett 591 So. 2d 1281 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
Supreme Court’s as follows: “...
Helms v. Helms 534 So. 2d 502 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
the Louisiana Supreme Court explained: the determination of “fault” in the separation proceedings is not res judicata in subsequent divorce proceedings, if only because the cause of action and the thing demanded are not the same, as required by Civil Code Article 2286 [the substance of former article 22
Guillory v. Guillory 490 So. 2d 758 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
the wife obtained a judicial separation on the ground of the husband's abandonment.
Lagars v. Lagars 491 So. 2d 5 La. 1986
the wife obtained a judicial separation based on the husband's fault (abandonment), and the husband obtained a divorce on a no-fault basis, by reason of the expiration of the statutory period following judicial separation, without reconciliation, under La.R.S.
Bergeron v. Munsch 471 So. 2d 302 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
Rutherford v. Rutherford 452 So. 2d 432 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
Morgan v. Valley 424 So. 2d 541 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1982
Duncan v. Duncan 408 So. 2d 449 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Ebey v. Ebey 403 So. 2d 790 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
Lauro v. Lauro 399 So. 2d 1297 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1981
Florent v. Florent 393 So. 2d 912 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1981
In Laurent, supra, and correctly stated that the Supreme Court there held that a judgment of separation in favor of a party is a conclusive determination of fault which precludes litigation of the fault issue in a subsequent divorce action, “except as to post-separation fault”.
Lovell v. Lovell 386 So. 2d 1063 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
Sklar v. Sklar 387 So. 2d 1308 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
Collateral estoppel does not apply in Louisiana, is inapplicable in this case.
Tassin v. Sayes 386 So. 2d 995 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1980
relitigation of fault in divorce action; XIV La.L.Rev.
Rittiner v. Sinclair 374 So. 2d 680 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1979
160 in Pearce v. Pearce, La.1977, , and Fulmer v. Fulmer, La.1974, , and from C.C.
Laurent v. Laurent 369 So. 2d 476 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1979
(1974) the Louisiana Supreme Court held that a judgment of separation in favor of a party is a conclusive determination of fault which precludes litigation of the fault issue in a subsequent divorce action, except as to post-separation fault.
Bell v. Bell 368 So. 2d 777 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
Therefore, that fault determined in a proceeding for divorce is conclusive for purposes of permanent alimony following divorce is not applicable to the circumstances presented here.
Bruner v. Bruner 364 So. 2d 1015 La. 1978
in which a husband obtained a divorce under R.S.
Brannon v. Brannon 362 So. 2d 1164 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1978
Bruner v. Bruner 356 So. 2d 1101 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1978
declares that the wife's fault previously determined in a separation decree shall not be dispositive on the question of her right to alimony where a divorce is sought for postseparation fault such as adultery.
Thomason v. Thomason 355 So. 2d 908 La. 1978
we held that the determination of fault in a separation proceeding is conclusive of pre-separation fault and cannot be relitigated.
Overruled DeFatta v. DeFatta 352 So. 2d 287 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1977
Thomason v. Thomason 349 So. 2d 928 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Bennett v. Bennett 349 So. 2d 909 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
In Fulmer v. Fulmer, La., (1974), the court, while not confronted with our exact issue, made the following statement: "Thus, the determination of marital fault by the separation judgment should be conclusive as to the legal cause of the separation, no matter upon what ground the divorce is sought."
Moon v. Moon 345 So. 2d 168 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1977
More specifically, is such a ?
Pearce v. Pearce 344 So. 2d 75 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1977
138(3) and thus (see Fulmer v. Fulmer, La.1974, ) make it "fault" within C.C.
Frederick v. Steber 346 So. 2d 315 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Shows v. Shows 345 So. 2d 975 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1977
Hatch v. Hatch 341 So. 2d 1270 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1977
Trahan v. Trahan 340 So. 2d 676 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
Patorno v. Schillaci 339 So. 2d 532 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
Fulmer v. Fulmer, La.S.Ct., (1974).
Mitchell v. Bertolla 340 So. 2d 287 La. 1976
relitigation of fault in divorce action; (La.App.
Cooper v. Cooper 336 So. 2d 928 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
Art. 160 finding plaintiff to be without fault ( , Sup.Ct., 1974) and that she had not sufficient means for her support.
Perez v. Perez 334 So. 2d 719 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
Sarpy v. Sarpy 323 So. 2d 851 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
He alleges specifically that the principles of Fulmer v. Fulmer, La., (1974) and Frederic v. Frederic, supra , are not applicable when there has been no separation proceeding and that the judgment of divorce is not determinative on the issue of fault.
Hermes v. Hermes 327 So. 2d 639 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
She relies on the cases of Fulmer v. Fulmer, La., (S.Ct.), Vinot v. Vinot, 239 La.
Kent v. Kent 323 So. 2d 817 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
Kent acknowledges the holding of Fulmer v. Fulmer, La., (1974), to the effect that once the husband’s fault is judicially determined to he the cause of the separation, the wife is entitled to alimony after divorce without further proof of fault.
Carter v. Carter 316 So. 2d 829 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
Vicknair v. Vicknair, supra ; Kendrick v. Kendrick, 236 La.
Broussard v. Menard 316 So. 2d 485 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
In oral argument, counsel for plaintiff urged that the rule of the Thornton case is *487
Wilson v. Wilson 317 So. 2d 629 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
This alimony shall be revoked if it becomes unnecessary, and terminates if the wife remarries.” Mr. Wilson’s authority for his position that the Lower Court should not at this time go into the question of Mrs. Wilson’s
Mendoza v. Mendoza 310 So. 2d 154 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1975
Mrs. Mendoza relies on the recent case of Fulmer v. Fulmer, La., (1974), in which the Louisiana Supreme Court held that when a judicial separation is granted in favor of the wife based upon the husband's fault, the question of the wife's freedom from fault cannot be litigated in a subsequent divorce proceeding when the divorce is sought under the provisions of LSA-R.S.
Bryant v. Bryant 310 So. 2d 648 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
Frederick v. Frederick, 302 So.
Fall v. Fontenot 307 So. 2d 779 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1975
Webster v. Webster 308 So. 2d 302 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
Defendant-wife, on the other hand, contends the trial judge was correct in finding her free from fault and, in addition, (1974), precludes a relitigation of fault for purposes of Article 160 in all cases where the question has been determined in a prior separation suit.
Nethken v. Nethken 307 So. 2d 563 La. 1975
Dowler v. Dowler 304 So. 2d 871 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
It seems almost apparent that the wife was awarded a separation on some fault grounds, bars relitigation of the fault issue as it relates to alimony after divorce.
Fontaine v. Fitzpatrick 303 So. 2d 539 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
Writs were granted in the Fulmer case by the Supreme Court, and indeed this question has been answered and laid to rest in that court’s decision, Fulmer v. Fulmer, #54510 on the Docket of the Supreme Court of Louisiana, by judgment dated October 11, 1974, .
Dunn v. Dunn 303 So. 2d 580 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1974
2 , handed down on October 11, 1974.