Traylor v. Traylor
Also decided on this docket: La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., January 25, 1974 290 So. 2d 390; La. Ct. App. 1st Cir., November 9, 1962 148 So. 2d 157
Traylor v. Traylor, 337 So. 2d 922 (La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1976).
Cited by
- Colvin v. Colvin 704 So. 2d 353 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
- Saacks v. Saacks 688 So. 2d 673 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
- Mason v. Mason 451 So. 2d 1257 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
- Hanley v. Hanley 381 So. 2d 963 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1980
- Watson v. Watson 372 So. 2d 639 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1979
- Otis v. Otis 341 So. 2d 84 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Lodatto v. Lodatto 238 La. 305
- Fuori v. Fuori 316 So. 2d 803
- Succession of Walker 288 So. 2d 328
Opinion text
337 So.2d 922 (1976) Margaret Elizabeth Jones TRAYLOR, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Norval Robertson TRAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant. No. 5637. Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit. September 29, 1976. *923 Polk, Foote, Randolph, Percy & Ledbetter by Lamar Polk Culpepper, Alexandria, for defendant-appellant. Voltz & Ware by John R. Hickman, Alexandria, for plaintiff-appellee. Before HOOD, MILLER and WATSON, JJ. MILLER, Judge. Defendant Norval Robertson Traylor appeals the award of $250 per month as alimony pendente lite (authorized by LSA-C.C. art. 148), pending trial of his and his wife's cross-claims for a judicial separation. Husband contends he can't pay that much alimony and seeks a reduction. We affirm. A judgment awarding alimony pendente lite prior to a hearing on the suit for judicial separation is an appealable judgment. Lodatto v. Lodatto, 238 La. 305 , 115 So.2d 359 (1959); Fuori v. Fuori, 316 So.2d 803 (La.App. 1 Cir. 1974). Both parties testified concerning the needs of plaintiff Margaret Elizabeth Jones Traylor and husband's ability to pay; the testimony taken at trial of the rule has not been made part of the record. Appellant made no effort to comply with LSA-C.C.P. arts. 2130, 2131 and 2132, relative to supplying a transcript of testimony or a written narrative of facts. Husband's request for a reduction is based on his contention that the trial court erred in evaluating facts. Where there are factual issues involved and the record on appeal contains neither the transcript of testimony nor an agreed statement of facts entered into between the parties or given by the trial judge, there is nothing for appellate review. Succession of Walker, 288 So.2d 328 (La.1974). The trial court judgment is affirmed at appellant's costs. AFFIRMED.