No. 94-C-0594 Precedential Reinstated Processed

Malone v. Malone

Louisiana Supreme Court · Filed May 6, 1994 · 637 So. 2d 1039

Cited by

Gilbreath v. Gilbreath 743 So. 2d 300 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
Byrne v. Sealy & Co. 742 So. 2d 668 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
Douglas v. Hillhaven Rest Home, Inc. 709 So. 2d 1079 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
State v. Pratt 671 So. 2d 328 La. 1996
Stelly v. Overhead Door Co. of BR 646 So. 2d 905 La. 1994
Wallace v. Helmer Directional Drilling, Inc. 641 So. 2d 624 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994

Authorities cited

Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.

Rhinehart v. Rhinehart 475 So. 2d 43
Rhinehart v. Rhinehart 477 So. 2d 692
Bernhardt v. Bernhardt 283 So. 2d 226

Opinion text

PER CURIAM. The court has ordered and reviewed the record in this case. Given the lack of any evidence in the record reflecting a real change in either spouses’ circumstances and the trial court’s recognition that the husband’s ability to pay has not been impaired by his reduction in income, we find the trial court abused its discretion in reducing the wife’s alimony as originally set by consent judgment. Accordingly, we remand to the trial court with instructions that the wife’s originally set alimony be reinstated. We also expressly recognize the husband’s right to reurge his motion to reduce or terminate alimony and to support that motion with proof of the requisite change of circumstances. See Rhinehart v. Rhinehart, 475 So.2d 43 (La.App. 2d Cir.), writ denied, 477 So.2d 692 (La.1985) (citing Bernhardt v. Bernhardt, 283 So.2d 226 (La.1973)). CALOGERO, C.J., and HALL and ORTIQUE, JJ., would grant the writ and docket for argument. DENNIS, J., not on panel.