Case Name: Nita Jean Welch, wife of Donald J. HINGLE. v. Donald J. HINGLE
Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1979-03-13
Citations: 369 So. 2d 271
Docket Number: No. 10423
Parties: Nita Jean Welch, wife of Donald J. HINGLE. v. Donald J. HINGLE.
Judges: Before REDMANN, STOULIG and BEER, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 369
Pages: 271–273

Head Matter:
Nita Jean Welch, wife of Donald J. HINGLE. v. Donald J. HINGLE.
No. 10423.
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.
March 13, 1979.
C. James Gelpi, New Orleans, for relator.
Dudley D. Flanders, New Orleans, for respondent.
Before REDMANN, STOULIG and BEER, JJ.

Opinion:
A husband invokes our supervisory jurisdiction to halt temporary pre-divorce alimony proceedings by his wife as an adjunct to her suit for separation from bed and board. The husband relies on Orr v. Orr, 1979, - U.S. -, 99 S.Ct. 1102, 59 L.Ed.2d 306, as effectively invalidating under U.S.Const. amend. 14, as denying equal protection of the law, the Louisiana temporary alimony law, Article 148 of the Louisiana Civil Code.
La.C.C. 148 is couched in terms of gender of the spouses. We hold, nevertheless, as authorized by C.C. 17 and 21 and, in keeping with the civil law tradition of "extensive interpretation," Geny, Method of Interpretation (La.Law Inst, trans.) § 105, and in view of the spouses' mutual obligations of "fidelity, support and assistance," C.C. 119, which survive at least in part until final divorce, Hillard v. Hillard, 1954, 225 La. 507, 73 So.2d 442, and in consonance with Whitt v. Vauthier, La.App. 4 Cir. 1977, 316 So.2d 202, writ refused, La., 320 So.2d 558, cert. denied 424 U.S. 955, 96 S.Ct. 1429, 47 L.Ed.2d 360, that the operative principle of C.C. 148 is not gender but need, and that accordingly C.C. 148 is properly interpreted to allow temporary alimony to be awarded to either spouse in need if the other spouse has the means to pay. Alternatively, we would hold that C.C. 119 by itself obliges either undivorced spouse with means to support the other when in need.
Support for the extensive interpretation of C.C. 148 is found in Loyacano v. Loyacano, La.1978, 358 So.2d 304, U.S. appl. pending, in that (as Mr. Justice Dennis notes, in his concurrence on rehearing, id. at 317) three members of the Louisiana Supreme Court adhere to the opinion on original hearing that the permanent alimony law, C.C. 160, despite its phrasing in terms of gender, does not deny alimony to ex-husbands, and that "a Louisiana court may allow alimony to a husband . . . under the same circumstances in which it can be claimed by the wife . . . ." Id. at 309. Support for non-discriminatory pre-divorce alimony from C.C. 119 is found in Hillard, supra, and more recently in Mr. Justice Calogero's dissent in Williams v. Williams, La.1976, 331 So.2d 438, 442, 443, asserting that C.C. 119 by itself supports pre-divorce alimony for a needy spouse of either sex. Thus a total of four of the present seven justices espouse the view, although for differing reasons, that pre-di-vorce alimony is available to either spouse on the same terms. There is thus no denial of equal protection in the Louisiana law of pre-divorce alimony and that law is not invalidated by U.S.Const. amend. 14.
Writs are therefore refused.
BEER, J., concurring with reasons.
. If the wife has not a sufficient income for her maintenance pending the suit for separation from bed and board or for divorce, the judge shall allow her, whether she appears as plaintiff or defendant, a sum for her support, proportioned to her needs and to the means of her husband.
. Laws in pari materia, or upon the same subject matter, must be construed with a reference to each other; what is clear in one statute may be called in aid to explain what is doubtful in another.
.In all civil matters, where there is no express law, the judge is bound to proceed and decide according to equity. To decide equitably, an appeal is to be made to natural law and reason, or received usages, where positive law is silent.