From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lamana v. LeBlanc

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit
May 25, 1984
449 So. 2d 31 (La. Ct. App. 1984)

Summary

In Lamana I and Lamana II, the demand is between the same parties (Lamana and LeBlanc) and is found against them in the same quality (biological father and mother of child).

Summary of this case from Lamana v. LeBlanc

Opinion

No. 83 CA 0421.

February 28, 1984. Rehearing Denied April 3, 1984. Writ Denied May 25, 1984.

APPEAL FROM FAMILY COURT, PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE, STATE OF LOUISIANA, HONORABLE ANTHONY J. GRAPHIA, J.

Wayne R. Crouch, Baton Rouge, for plaintiff-appellant Morris Michael Lamana.

Georgia Wilemon, Baton Rouge, for defendant-appellee Virginia Teressa LeBlanc.

Before COVINGTON, COLE and SAVOIE, JJ.


Plaintiff, Morris. M. Lamana, brought suit against defendant, Virginia T. LeBlanc, to be recognized as the father of defendant's infant son. The child was born within 300 days of defendant's divorce from Timothy J. Robillard. Robillard has not brought an action to disavow. Robillard was not made a defendant and no one was appointed to represent the child.

The trial court sustained defendant's peremptory exception of no cause and no right of action and dismissed plaintiff's suit. Plaintiff has appealed the judgment.

The issue presented to this Court, as it was to the trial court, is whether an alleged natural father has a right or cause of action to establish his paternity under LSA-C.C. art. 184, which presumption is now conclusive because of the failure of the husband of the mother to disavow paternity.

This issue has been fully considered and decided adversely to plaintiff-appellant in Fontenot v. Thierry, 422 So.2d 586 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1982), writ denied, 427 So.2d 868 (La. 1983). For the reasons expressed in Fontenot v. Thierry, the judgment appealed is affirmed at appellant's costs.

AFFIRMED.

COLE, J., concurs in the result.


Summaries of

Lamana v. LeBlanc

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit
May 25, 1984
449 So. 2d 31 (La. Ct. App. 1984)

In Lamana I and Lamana II, the demand is between the same parties (Lamana and LeBlanc) and is found against them in the same quality (biological father and mother of child).

Summary of this case from Lamana v. LeBlanc

In Lamana I, it was definitively held that Lamana had no right or cause of action to claim he was the biological father.

Summary of this case from Lamana v. LeBlanc
Case details for

Lamana v. LeBlanc

Case Details

Full title:MORRIS MICHAEL LAMANA v. VIRGINIA TERESSA LeBLANC

Court:Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit

Date published: May 25, 1984

Citations

449 So. 2d 31 (La. Ct. App. 1984)

Citing Cases

Smith v. Jones

This court has addressed the issue of whether an alleged natural father has a right to establish his…

Lamana v. LeBlanc

The First Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment and held the presumption that the…