Bagents v. Bagents
| Citation | 419 So.2d 460 |
| Decision Date | 07 September 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 82-C-0183,82-C-0183 |
| Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
| Parties | James Edwards BAGENTS v. Peggy Jean BAGENTS. |
Roy Maughan, Maughan, Atkinson & Martin, Baton Rouge, for applicant.
Michael V. Clegg, Macy, Adcock, Kemp, Dupree, McIntyre, Shows & Clegg, Baton Rouge, for respondent.
This is a child custody matter. After the mother obtained an October, 1979 divorce on the ground of adultery and was awarded custody of her five-year old daughter, the father in May, 1980 filed a rule for change of custody, alleging that the mother was living with a man in the same apartment with the minor child. After a hearing, the trial court granted custody to the father. Shortly thereafter, the mother married her paramour and filed a motion for new trial, which was denied. The mother appealed, and the court of appeal affirmed. 408 So.2d 393. We granted certiorari to review the decisions of the lower courts. 411 So.2d 47.
James and Peggy Bagents were married in 1972, and their only child was born in 1974. When the mother filed for a divorce, the father admitted having an adulterous affair with a 17-year old girl. Shortly after the divorce, the father married his correspondent in adultery in January, 1980.
In December, 1979, the mother began living with Wade Bourgeois, who was not yet divorced from his wife. This liaison continued uninterrupted until the father filed a rule for a change of custody in May, 1980. The week before the trial, on the advice of counsel, the mother moved out of Bourgeois' apartment. 1
At the hearing on the rule, the mother openly admitted that she had lived with Bourgeois, whom she planned to marry as soon as he secured his divorce. She also testified that "I do not think it's wrong as long as it's handled the right way", explaining:
The mother also testified that the child had been extremely upset after she and her husband separated, but became adjusted and happy after she and Bourgeois established their relationship. The mother asserted that the child had more of a family life under the present arrangement than she had when the father was living with them.
Other evidence showed that the child was doing well in school and was attending church regularly.
The father testified that although he had committed adultery before his separation from his former wife, he lived with his parents after the separation and did not begin living with his present wife until after they were married. He and his present wife also testified that she was not pregnant at the time of their marriage. There was also evidence of the father's use of marijuana during the previous marriage, but he denied use for a period of one year prior to trial. While he asserted that he was seeking a change of custody because the mother's relationship with Bourgeois had a detrimental effect on the child, he was aware of the relationship from its inception and did not object until an Easter Sunday fight over the late return of the child after weekend visitation. 2 He asserted, however, that prior to the fight he had consulted an attorney about the change of custody.
Thus, the evidence showed that neither parent was a model of morality. The father had committed adultery and used marijuana during the marriage, and he was motivated, at least in part, to seek a change of custody because of a fight with his former wife. The mother, on the other hand, lived in open concubinage with a married man in the same apartment with the child and not only defended the propriety of the relationship, but also suggested that it was beneficial to the child.
Faced with such evidence, the trial judge placed emphasis on the fact that a child learns by example from parents and that the mother's utter disregard for moral guidance and social standards is certain to affect the child adversely. Relying on the decisions in Bride v. Thon, 378 So.2d 152 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1979), and Beck v. Beck, 341 So.2d 580 (La.App. 2nd Cir. 1977), the trial court granted the change of custody. The trial judge in effect evaluated the mother's overall character and fitness, noting that the mother had chosen a presumptively detrimental relationship over consideration for the welfare of the child. The court of appeal admitted the dilemma faced by the trial court, but found no clear abuse of discretion in the trial court's determination that a change was in the child's best interest.
The principal consideration in every child...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Leblanc v. Leblanc
...4/5/00), 759 So.2d 219, 220 (quoting State in the Interest of Sylvester, 525 So.2d 604, 608 (La. App. 3 Cir.1988)) (citing Bagents v. Bagents, 419 So.2d 460 (La.1982)). Every child custody case must be viewed within its own peculiar set of facts, and a trial court's award of custody is enti......
-
Berzins v. Betts
...evaluate witnesses, but also because of proper allocation of trial and appellate functions between the respective courts. Bagents v. Bagents, 419 So.2d 460 (La.1982); Bentley v. Bentley, 440 So.2d 1365 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1983), writ denied, 444 So.2d 125 (La.1984). The trial judge is in a bet......
-
Miller v. Miller
...great discretion in this area, and its determination will not be disturbed in the absence of a clear abuse of discretion. Bagents v. Bagents, 419 So.2d 460 (La.1982); Kuhl v. Kuhl, 97-1725 (La.App. 3 Cir. 7/8/98); 715 So.2d 740. The fact finder's great discretion extends to its assessment o......
-
Menard v. Menard
...4/5/00), 759 So.2d 219, 220 (quoting State in the Interest of Sylvester, 525 So.2d 604, 608 (La.App. 3 Cir.1988) ) (citing Bagents v. Bagents, 419 So.2d 460 (La.1982) ). Every child custody case must be viewed within its own peculiar set of facts, and a trial court's award of custody is ent......