Case Name: HAYDEN v. HAYDEN
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1923-11-12
Citations: 154 La. 716
Docket Number: No. 25085
Parties: HAYDEN v. HAYDEN.
Judges: By Division .A, composed of Chief Justice O’NIELL and Justices ROGERS and BRU-NOT.
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 154
Pages: 716–717

Head Matter:
(98 South. 162)
No. 25085.
HAYDEN v. HAYDEN.
(Nov. 12, 1923.)
(Syllabus by Editorial Staff.)
Divorce &wkey;>298(3) — On separation, successful’ party is entitled to care of children and to alimony accordingly, in absence of showing for different disposition.
Under Civ. Code, art. 157, as amended and re-enacted by Act No. 88 of 1921, a party who obtains a judgment of separation or divorce is entitled to the care and keeping of the children, unless there is some reason of advantage to the children for placing them in the care of the other party, and, where no such reason appears, a judgment not allowing the successful party to keep the children continuously and to collect alimony accordingly is erroneous.
Appeal from Twenty-Eifth Judicial District Court, Parish of Tangipahoa; Robert S. Ellis, Judge.
Suit toy Mrs. Lucille P. Hayden against Allen Hayden, Jr., for separation, alimony, and custody of children. Prom a judgment awarding separation, but requiring her to divide the care and keeping of the children with her husband, and awarding alimony on that basis, plaintiff appeals.
Judgment ■ amended.
Shelby S. Reid, of Amite, for appellant.
M. J. Allen, of Amite, for appellee.
By Division .A, composed of Chief Justice O’NIELL and Justices ROGERS and BRU-NOT.

Opinion:
O'NIELL, C. J.
Plaintiff sued for a separation from bed and hoard, for alimony, and for the care and keeping of her two children. She obtained a judgment of separation, from which the defendant did not appeal. She has appealed from the judgment in so far as it requires her to divide with her husband the care and keeping of the children, and in so far as the alimony allowed her, which is $20 a month, is pay able not continuously but only while the children are in her care and keeping.
The judgment provides that the children shall be with the plaintiff three months and then with the defendant three months, and then go back to the plaintiff for three months, and so on, alternating, indefinitely. Plaintiff was allowed alimony at $20 a month, for the support of her children, but only for the time when they would be in her care and keeping.
According to article 157 of the Civil Code, as amended and re-enacted by Act 38 of 1921, p. 42, a party who obtains a judgment of separation or divorce is entitled to the care and keeping of the children, unless there is some reason, of advantage to the children, for placing them- in the care of the other party. We do not find any reason in this case for withholding plaintiff's right to have her children continuously in her care and keeping and to collect the alimony every month.
The judgment appealed from is amended so as to leave the children continuously in the care and keeping of the appellant, and so as to make the alimony payable every month. The costs of this appeal are to be paid by the appellee.