Jenkins v. Jenkins
882 So. 2d 705, 2004 WL 2101815 (2004)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A spouse's habitual intemperance and resulting verbal and physical abuse constitute lawful cause for the other spouse to leave the matrimonial domicile, thereby precluding a finding of fault for abandonment that would bar an award of permanent spousal support.
Facts:
- Frank Jenkins and Brenda Jenkins were married for 19 years.
- Brenda alleged that Frank drank excessively every afternoon, causing a personality change and leading to verbal and physical abuse.
- Brenda testified that when Frank was drinking, he would verbally degrade her, call her a 'fucking bitch,' accuse her of infidelity, pull her hair, and twist her arm.
- Frank denied drinking excessively or ever abusing Brenda, claiming she drank with him.
- Brenda moved out of the matrimonial home for the final time on March 21, 2002.
- Frank owned a mobile home park that generated approximately $12,000 per month in revenue.
- Witness testimony was conflicting: Brenda's sister and Frank's daughter-in-law corroborated claims of his excessive drinking and abusive behavior, while Frank's brothers and son testified he was not abusive and only drank socially.
- Frank's ex-wife, Judy Bennett Jenkins, testified that during their prior marriages, Frank had also accused her of infidelity and used abusive language.
Procedural Posture:
- Brenda Jenkins filed for divorce from Frank Jenkins in a Louisiana district court (trial court).
- Brenda petitioned for interim and permanent spousal support.
- The trial court granted the divorce.
- Following a trial on the support issues, the court found Brenda was free from fault and awarded her $700 per month in permanent spousal support.
- The trial court denied Brenda's motion for past due interim support.
- Frank Jenkins (defendant-appellant) appealed the judgment awarding permanent support to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit.
- Brenda Jenkins (plaintiff-appellee) answered the appeal, seeking to increase the award and to reverse the denial of her claim for past due interim support.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a spouse's habitual excessive drinking and resulting verbal and physical abuse constitute 'lawful cause' for the other spouse to leave the matrimonial domicile, thereby precluding a finding of fault for abandonment that would bar permanent spousal support?
Opinions:
Majority - Moore, J.
Yes. A spouse who leaves the marital home due to the other spouse's habitual intemperance and abusive conduct has lawful cause for doing so and is therefore not at fault for abandonment. To receive permanent spousal support, a claimant must be free from legal fault, which is misconduct of a serious nature that is a proximate cause of the marital breakup. While abandonment is a form of legal fault, it requires leaving without 'lawful cause.' Lawful cause is established by showing conduct equivalent to grounds for separation, such as habitual intemperance or cruel treatment that renders living together insupportable. The court found credible testimony that Frank's habitual, excessive consumption of alcohol led to abusive language and behavior calculated to destroy Brenda's peace of mind, thus providing her with lawful cause to leave. Therefore, Brenda was free from fault and eligible for permanent spousal support.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the scope of 'lawful cause' as an exception to abandonment in Louisiana divorce law. It affirms that a persistent pattern of verbal abuse and habitual intemperance can be sufficient to justify a spouse's departure from the marital home, even without extensive physical violence. The ruling underscores the trial court's significant discretion in making credibility determinations when faced with conflicting witness testimony. By defining such behavior as rendering the marriage 'insupportable,' the case provides a precedent for spouses seeking to escape emotionally abusive environments without being penalized as 'at fault' in spousal support determinations.
