State of Louisiana VS Russell J. Bergeron, Jr.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2009 CA 2140 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS RUSSELL JOSEPH BERGERON JR Judgment Rendered May 7 2010 APPEALED FROM THE SIXTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE PARISH OF ST MARY STATE OF LOUISIANA DOCKET NUMBER 2009NS 705 DIVISION C THE HONORABLE JOHN E CONERY JUDGE J Phil Haney District Attorney Walter J Senette Jr Assistant District Attorney Attorneys for Plaintiff Appellant State of Louisiana Franklin Louisiana E C Bourg II Morgan City Louisiana Attorney for Defendant Appellee Russell J Bergeron Jr BEFORE PARRO KUHN AND McDONALD JJ ME z O I C40 WDONALD I This is a suit for child support enforcement The defendant Russell J Bergeron Jr is the father of two minor children by Chastity M Aucoin On February 13 2006 Mr Bergeron was ordered to pay Ms Aucoin 00 489 per month child support for one child On May 11 2009 the State through the Department of Social Services Office of Support Enforcement Services filed a motion to modify the previous child support order seeking to add the second child to Mr Bergeron support obligation and recalculate the amount s of child support due On July 21 2009 the hearing officer followed the child support guidelines set forth in La R 9 and fixed the child support S 315 19 obligation at 1 See La R 46 00 078 S 236 a 3 C 5 On July 23 2009 Mr Bergeron filed an objection to the findings of the hearing officer At the hearing Mr Bergeron testified that he had remarried and fathered a third child with his second wife He objected to paying the full amount set out in the guidelines for two children because he was legally obligated to support his third child The State argued that Mr Bergeron was obligated to pay the full amount set out in the guidelines for two children despite his obligation to his third child The district court determining that the third child should be reflected in the child support obligation reduced the support payment to 981 two thirds of the 00 amount for three children The district court reasoned that the law did not envision that a father could not remarry and have a second family The State appealed that judgment asserting that the district court deviation s from the child support guidelines was an abuse of discretion because it was solely See La R 46 et seq S 236 1 2 Apparently this was a miscalculation and the amount should have been 1 00 061 2 based upon the fact that Mr Bergeron had fathered another child by a different woman After a thorough review of the law and the specific facts underlying this matter we find no abuse of discretion or error by the district court Therefore the judgment is affirmed and this opinion is issued in compliance with Louisiana Uniform Rules Courts of Appeal Rule 2 16 and 8 Costs of 7 6 4 2 2A the appeal in the amount of 213 are assessed against the State 50 AFFIRMED 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
