Case Name: Elijah ALFRED, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Delores Marie W. ALFRED, Defendant-Appellee
Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1970-06-18
Citations: 237 So. 2d 94
Docket Number: No. 3120
Parties: Elijah ALFRED, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Delores Marie W. ALFRED, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before FRUGÉ, CULPEPPER and MILLER, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 237
Pages: 94–96

Head Matter:
Elijah ALFRED, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Delores Marie W. ALFRED, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 3120.
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.
June 18, 1970.
Rehearing Denied July 24, 1970.
Writ Granted Sept. 30, 1970.
Nelson & Nelson, Michael A. Des-sommes, New Orleans, for plaintiff-appellant.
Preston N. Aucoin, Ville Platte, for defendant-appellee.
Before FRUGÉ, CULPEPPER and MILLER, JJ.

Opinion:
FRUGÉ, Judge.
Plaintiff, Elijah Alfred, instituted this action on April 15, 1969, seeking a judgment of absolute divorce from his wife, Delores Marie Alfred, on the basis of two years living separate and apart. The trial court awarded the plaintiff a judgment of absolute divorce, and the plaintiff and the defendant each a one-half interest in a pending lawsuit which was the entirety of the community of acquets and gains existing between the parties. Plaintiff appeals the judgment insofar as it granted defendant one-half interest in the pending lawsuit as her share of the community property. The defendant did not answer the appeal.
On July 30, 1969, after instituting this suit for divorce, plaintiff filed an action ex delicto in Orleans Parish styled, "Elijah Alfred vs. William H. Rorer, Inc., et al." The action was based on an alleged misapplication of a dye on September 19, 1968, which completely disabled Mr. Alfred by paralyzing his lower extremities. The plaintiff contends that the trial court erred.in awarding his wife a one-half interest in the lawsuit.
Louisiana Civil Code Article 155 provides in part: "The judgment of separation from bed and board carries with it the separation of goods and effects and is ret roactive to the date on which the petition for same was filed. " Therefore, the community of acquets and gains between plaintiff and defendant was terminated on April 15, 1969, the date the plaintiff filed his petition for a divorce, and some seven months after the alleged injury to plaintiff.
The plaintiff concedes, and Louisiana courts have consistently held, that actions for damages for offenses and quasi-offenses committed against the husband are community property by virtue of Louisiana Civil Code Article 2334. However, the plaintiff contends that only those damages accrued as of the date of the filing of the petition for divorce are to be considered community property, and conversely those damages accruing after that date should not be considered community property.
The plaintiff relies on the case of Talley v. Employers Mutual Liability Ins. Co., 181 So.2d 784 (La.App. 4th Cir. 1965), writ refused 248 La. 785, 181 So.2d 783 (1966), which seems to be the only Louisiana case resolving this issue. In that case, the husband was injured during the existence of the community of acquets and gains, but recovered damages after its termination. The trial court made two awards for damages : one to the community of acquets and gains for damages accrued as of the time of the dissolution of the community; and, one to the husband for damages incurred after the termination of the community of acquets and gains. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's decision, and the Louisiana Supreme Court refused to review the appellate court's decision.
In the instant case, the plaintiff was injured during the existence of the community of acquets and gains, and all damages recovered, if any, will be after its dissolution. The present case cannot be distinguished from the Talley case, supra. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court must be amended by limiting the community of acquets and gains' share of the pending lawsuit in Orleans Parish to those damages, if any, which accrued prior to April 15, 1969, the date the community of acquets and gains was terminated. In all other respects, the judgment of the trial court is correct.
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed as amended. All costs of this appeal are assessed to the defendant-appellee.
Affirmed and amended.