![]() The first interrogatory propounded upon Emerson asked: " Are you Emerson] indebted unto defendant, Kayla V. Emerson responded to the interrogatories, under oath and in writing, and, on July 8, 2014, filed its responses into the record. Ascension requested The trial court ordered Emerson be cited as garnishee and answer the interrogatories attached to the petition for garnishment. ![]() Emerson answer the accompanying interrogatories. (" Emerson") and that Emerson was indebted unto Daigle for his salary and/ or wages. Ascension then filed a petition for 2 garnishment, alleging that Brandt Daigle was employed by Emerson Process Management Power & Water Solutions, Inc. The trial court thus issued an order declaring that the Octojudgment could be executed against the community property regime existing between Kayla Babin and Brandt Daigle. Daigle admitted under oath that he was married to Kayla Babin and had never entered a separate property marital agreement with her. The trial court ordered Daigle to appear before the court, answer questions concerning the community property regime between himself and judgment debtor, Kayla Babin, and show cause why the Octojudgment should not be executed against the community property of himself and Kayla Babin. After default judgment was confirmed against the defendants, the trial court issued a " Rule to Confirm Existence of Community Property Regime" to Brandt Daigle, an individual who was not a party to the original suit. The judgment rendered against the defendants in the full sum of $ in Ascension' s favor, signed on October 10, 2012, has never been collected. A default judgment was entered and confirmed 20,338.99. The defendants did not respond to the suit. ![]() Ascension prayed for judgment in its favor in an amount equal to $ 20,338.99, plus interest, costs, and attorney fees. Ascension filed suit to enforce its rights against the defendants on a promissory note. Babin Credit Union (" Ascension"), and her then- husband, Jacob against the P. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY This dispute derives from a suit filed on April 2, 2012, by the plaintiff-appellant, defendants, Ascension Kayla V. For the following reasons, the appeal is maintained and the trial court's judgment is affirmed. This appeal is taken from a judgment entered by the Twenty-Third Judicial District Court, denying the plaintiff-appellant's motion for judgment pro confesso. Babin Prairieville, Louisiana BEFORE: McDONALD, McCLENDON, AND THERIOT, JJ. Bankston Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellant Baton Rouge, Louisiana Ascension Credit Union Kayla V. 103319 The Honorable Alvin Turner, Jr., Judge Presiding Richard D. BABIN Judgment Rendered: NOV o 6 2015 Appealed from the 23rd Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of Ascension State of Louisiana Case No. 2014 CA 1653 ASCENSION CREDIT UNION VERSUS KAYLA V. STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NO.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |