Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

532 So. 2d 101

Docket No. 88-C-1477.

Thompson v. Thompson

Kevie Wright THOMPSON v. Timothy Robert THOMPSON.

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided October 14, 1988.

Supreme Court of Louisiana · decided 1988-10-14

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“In child custody cases, the decision of the trial court is to be given great weight and overturned only where there is a clear abuse of discretion.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 671 So. 2d 1081 - Oliver v. Oliver

Relies on 390 So. 2d 1325 - Bordelon v. Bordelon · 383 So. 2d 1231 - Cleeton v. Cleeton

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1988-10-14

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably 661 So. 2d 706 - Warlick v. Warlick (1995), McKinley v. McKinley (1994)

62 state decisions

2401988199020002010decided

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 →

¶1PER CURIAM.

¶2GRANTED.

¶3This matter comes before the Court on Kevie Thompson's application for writs of certiorari or review to review the Court of Appeal's reversal of the trial court's decision in this child custody case. For the reasons stated, we reverse the Court of Appeal and remand this matter to the trial court.

¶4Christyl Thompson is the daughter of Kevie and Tim Thompson. Kevie and Tim were legally separated in 1985. The separation decree incorporated by reference a joint custody plan previously filed by the parties. Kevie and Tim had joint custody with Kevie having primary physical care of Christyl and Tim having specified visitation rights. In March of 1985, Kevie filed a Rule to terminate joint custody, alleging Tim had molested Christyl. After a trial on the merits, the district court entered a judgment terminating joint custody and denying Tim any visitation. The Court of Appeal reversed and ordered the resumption of Tim's joint custody and visitation rights.

¶5We find the Court of Appeal applied the improper standard of review. In child custody cases, the decision of the trial court is to be given great weight and overturned only where there is a clear abuse of discretion. See, e.g., Bordelon v. Bordelon,390 So.2d 1325 (La.1980); Cleeton v. Cleeton,383 So.2d 1231 (La.1980) (on rehearing). The record here provides ample support for the trial court's decision as regards the termination of joint custody. Of particular note is the fact both independent experts appointed by the court thought it probable Tim had sexually abused Christyl.

¶6We recognize the evidence of Tim's abuse was somewhat ambiguous; also, Tim did introduce evidence of his own psychological state at the trial. Moreover, the court-appointed experts recommended Tim's contact with Christyl not be entirely terminated. Our law recognizes the need for a child to have contact with both parents. See La.C.C. article 146. The statutory mandate and the best interest of the child are best served by permitting Tim some contact with his daughter. Accordingly, *102 we remand this matter to the trial court to formulate a plan of restricted, supervised visitation between Tim and Christyl pursuant to La.C.C. article 147. WRIT GRANTED; COURT OF APPEAL REVERSED; TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT MODIFIED; REMANDED.

¶7DIXON, C.J., and DENNIS, J., would grant and docket for briefing and argument.

/532/so2d/101 · .json · Public domain