Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

462 So. 2d 682

Drummond v. Drummond

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided December 19, 1984

Louisiana Court of Appeal · decided 1984-12-19

Relies on 428 So. 2d 1059 - Dugas v. Dugas

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1984-12-19

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently January 2000

3 state decisions

10198419902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

WARD, Judge.

¶1This is an appeal by Mr. Abraham Drum-mond from a judgment increasing permanent alimony payable to Lee Ethel Smith Drummond from $80.00 per month to $120.00 per month. The sole issue before the court is whether the Trial Judge erred in awarding the increase. We believe the record supports the trial court judgment and we affirm.

¶2The Trial Court is vested with much discretion in fixing alimony and should not be reversed absent a clear abuse of that discretion. Dugas v. Dugas, 428 So.2d 1059, (La.App. 3rd Cir.1983). Mr. Drummond’s own testimony shows he has consistently refused to pay alimony simply because he believes Mrs. Drummond doesn’t need or deserve it. Mr. Drummond testified that his net monthly income is at least $1,000.00 dollars and that his expenses are relatively low.

¶3The record also shows that since permanent alimony was last fixed by the court, Mrs. Drummond is now unemployed due to no fault of her own, that, her monthly expenses are $712.93 per month; and that she is a fifty-five year old woman with some medical problems that limit her ability to work.

¶4Under these circumstances, and especially in light of Mr. Drummond’s own testimony, we do not believe the Trial Judge erred.

¶5AFFIRMED.

/462/so2d/682 · .json · Public domain