CA-0003-1088 Nonprecedential Dismissed Processed

Rhonda Jean Hernandez v. Randy James Theriot

Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit · Filed February 4, 2004

Opinion text

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

03-1088

RHONDA JEAN HERNANDEZ

VERSUS

RANDY JAMES THERIOT

**********

APPEAL FROM THE
SIXTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
PARISH OF IBERIA, NO. 74,818
HONORABLE CHARLES LEE PORTER, DISTRICT JUDGE

**********

PER CURIUM

**********

Court composed of Billie Colombaro Woodard and Elizabeth A. Pickett, Judges and
Arthur J. Planchard, Jr., Judge Pro Tempore.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

R. Michael Moity Jr.
114 W. Washington St.
New Iberia, LA 70560
Counsel for: Defendant-Appellant
Randy James Theriot

Alicia Johnson Butler
P.O. Box 9097
New Iberia, LA 70562
Counsel for: Plaintiff-Appellee
Rhonda Jean Hernandez

PER CURIUM.

Randy James Theriot appeals the trial court’s ruling on a rule for custody filed

by his ex-wife, Rhonda Jean Hernandez. The rule was filed on May 17, 2001, asking

that the domiciliary custody of the minor child, Reggie Theriot, be changed to the

mother. The minutes suggest that a hearing was held on the rule on October 23,

2001, at which time the matter was taken under advisement. A minute entry made on

December 4, 2001, shows that the court ordered joint custody with alternating

physical custody. Although the parties each attach to their brief a copy of reasons for

judgment concerning the custody issue which were apparently handed down by the

trial court on February 15, 2002, these reasons do not appear of record. In his motion

for appeal, the Appellant refers to a final judgment rendered August 9, 2002.

However, that judgment adjudicates child support not child custody. We find in the

record no judgment concerning custody dated subsequent to the October hearing on

that issue. Nonetheless, counsel for appellant moved for and was granted an appeal.

In the absence of a final signed judgment on the custody issue, this court may

not entertain an appeal on that issue. Therefore, the appeal of this matter is dismissed.

The parties may, of course, reassert the appeal within the delays provided by law, after

rendition of judgment. Costs of this appeal are assessed to the Appellant.

APPEAL DISMISSED.