Cason v. Cason, 89-143

• Decision Date: 27 June 1990
• Docket Number: No. 89-143,89-143
• Citation: 564 So.2d 808
• Parties: Rae Wood CASON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Delton H. CASON, Defendant-Appellee. 564 So.2d 808
• Court: Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US

Page 808

564 So.2d 808 Rae Wood CASON, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Delton H. CASON, Defendant-Appellee. No. 89-143. 564 So.2d 808 Court of Appeal of Louisiana,
Third Circuit. June 27, 1990.
Rehearing Denied Aug. 8, 1990.

Page 809

Bethard & Davis, James G. Bethard, Coushatta, for plaintiff/appellant.

Watson, Murchison, Crews, Arthur & Corkern, R. Raymond Arthur, Natchitoches, for defendant/appellee.

Before DOMENGEAUX, C.J., and GUIDRY and KNOLL, JJ.

GUIDRY, Judge.

This case involves the partition of the former community of acquets and gains that existed between Rae Wood Cason (now Warren) and Delton H. Cason. The parties were able to agree on the status and disposition of all but three items of property: an account at Peoples Bank and Trust Company; a cash management account with Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Smith, Inc.; and, five acres of land with a stipulated value of $10,000.00. The trial court found both accounts to be the separate property of Delton and awarded him the five acres of land as partial reimbursement for separate funds expended for the benefit of the community. Rae appeals.

On appeal Rae Wood Cason urges trial error as follows: (1) the trial court erred in finding the cash accounts to be her former husband's separate property; (2) the trial court erred in its disposition of the five acres of land; and, (3) the trial court erred in excluding evidence concerning services rendered the community by Rae during Delton's recovery from a serious accident.

Delton Cason answered the appeal urging that the trial court erred in not declaring former La.C.C. art. 2334 unconstitutional and in not granting judgment in his favor against his former wife for $126,094.10, one-half the amount of the alleged separate funds he claims were spent for the benefit of the community.

Although we ultimately reach a different result, we note that the trial judge succinctly set forth the facts of this case and correctly stated the law applicable to those facts in his reasons for judgment. We adopt the following portion of the trial judge's reasons for judgment:

"This matter is before the court on a petition by Gladys Cason Warren, whereby she seeks to have a partition of the community of acquets and gains which formerly existed between herself and the defendant herein, Delton H. Cason. All of the community property issues have been resolved with the exception of one. The only remaining issue before the court relates to a sum of money which was derived in settlement of a personal injury sustained by Mr. Cason. It is the contention of Mrs. Cason, that the injury occurred during the marriage, and prior to the amendment of Civil Code Articles 2334 ¹ and 2402 ², therefore

Page 810

the funds derived from the personal injury to her husband fall into the community. It is the contention of Mr. Cason that former Article 2334 is either not applicable or was an unconstitutional gender-based statute, and that as a result thereof, the funds derived from the settlement should be his separate property.

The chronology of the facts pertinent to this litigation are as follows:

1. May 30, 1969: Mr. and Mrs. Cason married and established their matrimonial domicile in Natchitoches Parish, Louisiana.

2. December 31, 1977: Mr. Cason fell 125 feet from an oil rig into the Gulf of Mexico sustaining serious injury.

3. May 30, 1979: Mr. Cason filed suit for damages as a result of his personal injury.

4. January 1, 1980: Effective date of the amendment of Louisiana Civil Code Article 2344 ³ declaring that personal injuries to either the husband or wife became the separate property of that particular spouse.

5. December 14, 1982: Mr. Cason received the funds derived from his personal injury litigation.

6. June 24, 1986: Filing date of the petition for separation from bed and board between these parties which ultimately resulted in the termination of the community of acquets and gains.

. . . . .

As the chronology of events set forth above clearly manifests, the funds were received some three and one half years prior to dissolution. Mr. Cason received a net recovery of $333,405.82 of which $94,000.00 remains at this time.

In well written briefs counsel for both parties have cited and discussed West v. Ortego, 325 So2d 242 (La.1975); Placide v. Placide, 408 So2d 330 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1981); Mead v. Mead, 442 So2d 870 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1983) along with other Louisiana jurisprudence dealing with prior Civil Code Articles 2334 and 2402 and present Civil Code Article 2344. They have likewise discussed the applicable law review articles. Mead, West and Placide all dealt with similar factual situations where (A) a husband was injured during the existence of the community and (B) a personal injury settlement was received after dissolution of that community. In all three cases the courts skirted the U.S. Constitutional issues and reached sound, common sense results by acknowledging that these awards for personal injuries are primarily to compensate for...