Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

922 So. 2d 1234

Stapleton v. Stapleton

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided February 1, 2006

Louisiana Court of Appeal · decided 2006-02-01

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 2011

1 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“An account shall be kept of all costs incurred by a party who has been permitted to litigate without the payment of 14costs, by the public officers to whom these costs would be payable. If judgment is rendered in favor of the indigent party, the party against whom the judgment is rendered shall be condemned to pay all costs due such officers, who have a privilege on the judgment superior to the rights of the indigent party or his attorney. If judgment is rendered against the indigent plaintiff and he is condemned to pay court costs, an affidavit of the account by an officer to whom costs are due, recorded in the mortgage records, shall have the effect of a judgment for the payment due.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 79 So. 3d 1287 - Porter v. Porter

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2006-02-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1SUMMARY OPINION

PETERS, J.

¶211 This litigation arises from a divorce suit filed by David Stapleton (David) against his wife, Patricia Fussell Stapleton (Patricia). The trial court subsequently rendered judgment in favor of David, granting him a divorce, but ordered him to pay one-half of the accrued costs of court. He has appealed only that part of the judgment related to the assessment of costs of court. For the following reasons, we reverse that portion of the judgment and assess all costs of these proceedings against Patricia.

¶3The facts are not in dispute in this litigation. David filed his suit for divorce on March 1, 2005, and, on that same day, obtained an order from the trial court granting him the privilege of litigating the matter without prior payment of costs of court. On April 12, 2005, Patricia filed a handwritten, proper person answer to the petition. On June 13, 2005, with both parties present in open court, the trial court heard evidence on the principal demand and rendered judgment granting David a divorce against his wife, authorizing Patricia to resume the use of her maiden name, and assessing all court costs equally between the litigants.

¶4Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 1920 grants the trial court discretion to render a judgment for costs against any party “[ejxcept as otherwise provided by law.” However, La.Code Civ.P. art. 5186 provides in pertinent part that “[i]f judgment is rendered in favor of the indigent party, the party against whom the judgment is rendered shall be condemned to pay all costs due” to the public officers otherwise entitled to collect court costs. (Emphasis added.)

¶5The record establishes that David was granted the privilege of litigating his claim for divorce without paying the costs of court, as allowed by La.Code Civ.P. art. 5181; that the privilege was never revoked by the trial court; and that he prevailed on | ghis claim at trial. Under these circumstances, the explicit language of La.Code Civ.P. art. 5186 mandates that the trial court cast Patricia with all court costs due. Therefore, we find merit in David’s appeal and reverse that portion of the trial court’s judgment.

¶6DISPOSITION

¶7For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the trial court’s judgment requiring that David Stapleton pay one-half of the accrued trial court costs and render judgment assessing all costs of these proceedings, including the costs of this appeal, against Patricia Fussell Stapleton.

¶8REVERSED AND RENDERED.

/922/so2d/1234 · .json · Public domain