Matthew Wayne Mccauley V Rowena Bautista Mccauley

Key Facts

Issues

• Whether the trial court committed error by awarding attorney fees to Rowena in this matter, alternatively whether the trial court committed error by awarding an unreasonably high amount of attorney fees in the amount of $15,500.00 pursuant to the Domestic Abuse Assistance Act.
• Whether the trial court committed error by refusing to consider and denying without a hearing Matthew Wayne McCauley's Motion to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order when the initial TRO was allegedly improperly granted based upon false factual information in Rowena Bautista McCauley's petition and attached exhibits.
• Whether the trial court committed error and abused its discretion by awarding Rowena the exclusive use of Matthew's separate property residence for an eighteen-month period pursuant to the granting of the protective order, since Matthew and Rowena have no children together.
• Whether the trial court committed error in granting the protective order based upon the incidents enumerated in the petitioner's application, given that Matthew contends he was merely defending his property, defending himself, or defending a third person on the three occasions when Rowena alleges domestic abuse occurred.
• Whether the trial court committed error and abused its discretion by allowing the introduction of improper evidence at trial, including testimony about incidents not specifically alleged in the petition, a suit record from another case, counseling center documents, uncertified medical records, and pictures of clothing allegedly used for emotional abuse.

Holdings

Remedies

• Pursuant to a written judgment dated August 26, 2019, the trial court awarded Rowena Bautista McCauley attorney fees in the amount of $15,500.00. The court determined that under La.R.S. 46:2136.1(A) of the Domestic Abuse Assistance Act, all attorney fees incurred in defending against domestic abuse proceedings must be paid by the perpetrator of the domestic violence, which in this case was Matthew Wayne McCauley.
• The trial court granted a protective order effective through December 14, 2020, awarding Rowena Bautista McCauley exclusive use and possession of the marital residence at 2709 Laura Lane in Lake Charles, Louisiana. The order prohibited Matthew Wayne McCauley from accessing the residence and included his eviction. The court found the protective order was necessary to cease domestic abuse and psychological harm, even though the residence was Matthew's separate property and they had no children together.

Monetary Damages

Legal Principles

• In domestic abuse cases under Louisiana's Domestic Abuse Assistance statute, a trial court's order is reversible only upon a showing of an abuse of discretion. The trial court sitting as the trier of fact is in the best position to evaluate the demeanor of witnesses, and its credibility determinations will not be disturbed absent manifest error. When findings are based on credibility determinations, the manifest error-clearly wrong standard demands great deference to the trier of fact's findings.
• In non-homicide cases involving self-defense claims, the defendant bears the burden of proving self-defense by a preponderance of the evidence. This requires both an objective inquiry into whether the force used was reasonable under the circumstances and a subjective inquiry into whether the force was apparently necessary.
• Hearsay is not admissible except as otherwise provided by the Code of Evidence. Exceptions include statements for medical treatment and diagnosis under La.Code Evid. art. 803(4), and records of regularly conducted business activity under La.Code Evid. art. 803(6). Medical records and business records may be admitted when they relate to treatment or are kept in the course of regularly conducted business activity, absent evidence of lack of trustworthiness.
• Under La.R.S. 14:19, use of force or violence is justifiable in certain circumstances. In non-homicide cases, the defendant must carry the burden of proving self-defense by a preponderance of the evidence. The inquiry requires both an objective component (whether force used was reasonable under circumstances) and a subjective component (whether force was apparently necessary).
• Under La.R.S. 46:2136.1(A) of the Domestic Abuse Assistance Act, all court costs, attorney fees, costs of enforcement and modification proceedings, costs of appeal, evaluation fees, and expert witness fees incurred in maintaining or defending proceedings concerning domestic abuse assistance shall be paid by the perpetrator of the domestic violence, including all costs of medical and psychological care for the abused adult.

Precedent Name

• Johnson v. Tucker
• Bettevy v. Bettevy
• Rosell v. ESCO
• Beard v. Beard
• Medine v. Roniger
• D.M.S. v. I.D.S.
• Ruiz v. Ruiz

Cited Statute

• Louisiana Code of Evidence
• Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure
• Domestic Abuse Assistance Act
• Louisiana Criminal Code

Judge Name

• Phyllis M. Keaty
• Billy Howard Ezell
• Shannon J. Gremillion

Passage Text

• The wording of LSA-R.S. 46:2136 makes it clear that the court is not limited to the enumerated relief. The legislature apparently fashioned the statute thus in order to permit the court to tailor relief to the circumstances of the case. Under the facts presented here, we find the decision by the trial court to award occupancy of the family home to Rowena is a protective order which results in the cessation of abuse by Matthew.
• The trial court's award was granted pursuant to the Domestic Abuse Assistance Act, La.R.S. 46:2136.1(A), which provides: All court costs, attorney fees, costs of enforcement and modification proceedings, costs of appeal, evaluation fees, and expert witness fees incurred in maintaining or defending any proceeding concerning domestic abuse assistance in accordance with the provisions of this Part shall be paid by the perpetrator of the domestic violence, including all costs of medical and psychological care for the abused adult, or for any of the children, necessitated by the domestic violence.
• In cases decided pursuant to the Domestic Abuse Assistance statute, a trial court's order is reversible only upon a showing of an abuse of discretion. Further, the trial court sitting as the trier of fact is in the best position to evaluate the demeanor of the witnesses and its credibility determinations will not be disturbed by this Court absent manifest error. When findings are based on determinations regarding the credibility of witnesses, the manifest error-clearly wrong standard demands great deference to the trier of fact's findings; for only the factfinder can be aware of the variations in demeanor and tone of voice that bear so heavily on the listener's understanding and belief in what is said.