style standard (Louisiana) · Go Syfert
← Louisiana issues

style standard in Louisiana

25 Louisiana opinions name it 1 courts 1995–2025 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Louisiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (5)

CaseFollowedCited
Hollowell v. Hollowellgreen
lactapp · 1983 · cited in 4 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1995–2001
2 sentences

2001Hollowell v. Hollowell, 437 So.2d 908 (La.App. 2d Cir.1983).

1997Hollowell v. Hollowell, 437 So.2d 908 (La.App. 2d Cir.1983).

24
Derouen v. Derouengreen
lactapp · 2005 · cited in 4 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2007–2010
2 sentences

2010“A claimant demonstrates need for interim spousal support if she establishes that she lacks sufficient income or the ability to earn a sufficient income ‘to sustain the style or standard of living that [s]he enjoyed while [s]he resided with the other spouse.’ ” Id. at 984 , quoting January v. January, 94-882, 94- *1260 888, p. 3 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/1/95), 649 So.2d 1133, 1136 .

2009Id.; see also Kirkpatrick v. Kirkpatrick, 41,851, pp. 3-4 (La. 2 Cir.App. 1/24/07), 948 So.2d 390, 393 (the burden is on the claimant spouse to prove that “he or she lacks sufficient income, or the ability to earn a sufficient income, to maintain the | Sstandard of living that he or she enjoyed during the marriage”) “Interim spousal support is designed to assist the claimant spouse in sustaining the same style or standard of living that he or she enjoyed while residing with the other spouse, pending the litigation of the divorce.” Lambert v. Lambert, 06-2399, p. 10 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/23/07), 96

14
Lambert v. Lambertgreen
lactapp · 2007 · cited in 3 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2008–2020
2 sentences

2009Id.; see also Kirkpatrick v. Kirkpatrick, 41,851, pp. 3-4 (La. 2 Cir.App. 1/24/07), 948 So.2d 390, 393 (the burden is on the claimant spouse to prove that “he or she lacks sufficient income, or the ability to earn a sufficient income, to maintain the | Sstandard of living that he or she enjoyed during the marriage”) “Interim spousal support is designed to assist the claimant spouse in sustaining the same style or standard of living that he or she enjoyed while residing with the other spouse, pending the litigation of the divorce.” Lambert v. Lambert, 06-2399, p. 10 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/23/07), 96

2009See Lambert, 06-2399 at p. 11, 960 So.2d at 928 (claimant demonstrates the need for intex-im spousal support if she establishes that she lacks sufficient income or the ability to earn a sufficient income to sustain the style or standard of living that she enjoyed while l-esiding with the other spouse).

13
Miller v. Millergreen
lactapp · 2014 · cited in 1 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018
1 sentence

2018If a support award is "within legal limits and based on facts supported by the record, we will not alter the amount of the award in the absence of an abuse of the trial judge's great discretion to set such awards." Miller , 161 So.3d at 697 ( quoting Baggett v. Baggett , 96-453, p. 4 (La.App. 3 Cir. 4/23/97), 693 So.2d 264 , 266-67 ).

11
Kirkpatrick v. Kirkpatrickgreen
lactapp · 2007 · cited in 1 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
1 sentence

2009Id.; see also Kirkpatrick v. Kirkpatrick, 41,851, pp. 3-4 (La. 2 Cir.App. 1/24/07), 948 So.2d 390, 393 (the burden is on the claimant spouse to prove that “he or she lacks sufficient income, or the ability to earn a sufficient income, to maintain the | Sstandard of living that he or she enjoyed during the marriage”) “Interim spousal support is designed to assist the claimant spouse in sustaining the same style or standard of living that he or she enjoyed while residing with the other spouse, pending the litigation of the divorce.” Lambert v. Lambert, 06-2399, p. 10 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/23/07), 96

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (14)

CaseCitedYears
January v. January green
lactapp · 1995
2 sentences

2018The need for interim spousal support *1010 is determined by establishing a spouse "lacks sufficient income or the ability to earn a sufficient income 'to sustain the style or standard of living that [s]he enjoyed while [s]he resided with the other spouse.' " January v. January , 94-882, 94-883, p. 3 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/1/95), 649 So.2d 1133 , 1136.

2010Interim support preserves parity in the levels of maintenance and support, and avoids “unnecessary financial dislocation until a final determination of support can be made.” Jones v. Jones, 38,790, p. 15 (La.App. 2 Cir. 6/25/04), 877 So.2d 1061, 1072 . [[Image here]] A claimant demonstrates need for interim spousal support if she establishes that she lacks sufficient income or the ability to earn a sufficient income “to sustain the style or standard of living that [s]he enjoyed while [s]he resided with the other spouse.” January v. January, 94-882, 94-883, p. 3 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/1/95), 649 So.

52005–2018
Daigle v. Daigle neutral
lactapp · 1996
2 sentences

2007Daigle v. Daigle, 96-541 (La.App. 3 Cir. 11/6/96) ; 689 So.2d 478 .

2004Daigle v. Daigle, 96-541 (La.App. 3 Cir. 11/6/96) , 689 So.2d 478 .

52001–2007
Brar v. Brar neutral
lactapp · 2001
2 sentences

2016A spouse’s right to claim interim periodic support “is grounded in the statutorily imposed duty on spouses to support each other during marriage, and thus, provides for the spouse who does not have sufficient income for his or her maintenance during the period of separation.” Brar v. Brar, 01-370, p. 5 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/3/01), 796 So.2d 810, 813 .

2005A spouse's right to claim interim periodic support "is grounded in the statutorily imposed duty on spouses to support each other during marriage, and thus, provides for the spouse who does not have sufficient income for his or her maintenance during the period of separation." Brar v. Brar, 01-370, p. 5 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/3/01), 796 So.2d 810, 813 .

22005–2016
Smoloski v. Smoloski green
lactapp · 2001
2 sentences

2016The Louisiana Civil Code’s regulations on interim spousal support are “designed to assist the claimant spouse in sustaining the same style or standard of living that he or she enjoyed while residing with the other spouse, pending the litigation of the divorce.” Smoloski v. Smoloski, 01-485, p. 2 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/3/01), 799 So.2d 599, 601 .

2005The Louisiana Civil Code's regulations on interim spousal support are "designed to assist the claimant spouse in sustaining the same style or standard of living that he or she enjoyed while residing with the other spouse, pending the litigation of the divorce." Smoloski v. Smoloski, 01-485, p. 2 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/3/01), 799 So.2d 599, 601 .

22005–2016
Dagley v. Dagley neutral
lactapp · 1997
2 sentences

2010“A spouse demonstrates a need for alimony pendente lite if she demonstrates that she lacks sufficient income to maintain the style or standard of living that she enjoyed while residing with [sic] other spouse during the marriage.” Dagley v. Dagley, 96-1796 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/21/97) , 695 So.2d 521, 522-23 .

2001App. 4 Cir. 5/21/97); 695 So.2d 521, 522-23 , our brethren of the fourth circuit observed as follows: A spouse demonstrates a need for alimony pendente lite if she demonstrates that she lacks sufficient income to maintain the style or standard of living that she enjoyed while residing with other spouse during the marriage.

22001–2010
Jones v. Jones green
lactapp · 2004
2 sentences

2010Interim support preserves parity in the levels of maintenance and support, and avoids “unnecessary financial dislocation until a final determination of support can be made.” Jones v. Jones, 38,790, p. 15 (La.App. 2 Cir. 6/25/04), 877 So.2d 1061, 1072 . [[Image here]] A claimant demonstrates need for interim spousal support if she establishes that she lacks sufficient income or the ability to earn a sufficient income “to sustain the style or standard of living that [s]he enjoyed while [s]he resided with the other spouse.” January v. January, 94-882, 94-883, p. 3 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/1/95), 649 So.

2010Interim support preserves parity in the levels of maintenance and support, and avoids “unnecessary financial dislocation until a final determination of support can be made.” Jones v. Jones, 38,790, p. 15 (La.App. 2 Cir. 6/25/04), 877 So.2d 1061, 1072 . [[Image here]] A claimant demonstrates need for interim spousal support if she establishes that she lacks sufficient income or the ability to earn a sufficient income “to sustain the style or standard of living that [s]he enjoyed while [s]he resided with the other spouse.” January v. January, 94-882, 94-883, p. 3 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/1/95), 649 So.

22005–2010
Lowentritt v. Lowentritt green
lactapp · 2012
1 sentence

2025Lowentritt, 90 So.3d at 1087 .

12025–2025
Baggett v. Baggett green
lactapp · 1997
1 sentence

2018If a support award is "within legal limits and based on facts supported by the record, we will not alter the amount of the award in the absence of an abuse of the trial judge's great discretion to set such awards." Miller , 161 So.3d at 697 ( quoting Baggett v. Baggett , 96-453, p. 4 (La.App. 3 Cir. 4/23/97), 693 So.2d 264 , 266-67 ).

12018–2018
McFall v. Armstrong neutral
lactapp · 2010
1 sentence

2014App. 5 Cir. 10/12/10); 50 So.3d 904, 906-907 .

12014–2014
Molony v. Harris green
lactapp · 2010
1 sentence

2012Molony v. Harris, 2009-1529, p. 3 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/14/10), 51 So.3d 752, 756 .

12012–2012
Koeniger v. Koeniger green
lactapp · 2009
1 sentence

2010“Interim spousal support is specifically designed to maintain the status quo during litigation and, as such, the burden is on the claimant to prove her entitlement to such 14support.” Koeniger v. Koeniger, 08-1054, p. 5 (La.App. 4 Cir. 3/4/09), 10 So.3d 271, 274 .

12010–2010
Dufresne v. Dufresne green
lactapp · 2008
1 sentence

2010Dufresne v. Dufresne, 08-215 (La.App. 5 Cir. 9/16/08) , 992 So.2d 579, 588 , unit denied, 08-2843 (La.12/17/08); 996 So.2d 1123 (citation omitted).

12010–2010
Dufresne v. Dufresne neutral
la · 2008
1 sentence

2010Dufresne v. Dufresne, 08-215 (La.App. 5 Cir. 9/16/08) , 992 So.2d 579, 588 , unit denied, 08-2843 (La.12/17/08); 996 So.2d 1123 (citation omitted).

12010–2010
Speight v. Speight neutral
lactapp · 2004
1 sentence

2009Speight v. Speight, 03-1152, p. 2 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/4/04), 866 So.2d 344, 346 .

12009–2009

Statutes the citing opinions construe

LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 9:315 (7) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 9:310 (3) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 9:315.19 (3) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 9:321 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

LA 25 (1995–2025) MI 3 (1972–2016)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check