Autin v. Terrebonne

612 So. 2d 107, 1992 WL 373428
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedSeptember 10, 1992
Docket92 CA 1688
StatusPublished
Cited by32 cases

This text of 612 So. 2d 107 (Autin v. Terrebonne) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Autin v. Terrebonne, 612 So. 2d 107, 1992 WL 373428 (La. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

612 So.2d 107 (1992)

Jervis AUTIN
v.
Rodney J. TERREBONNE, Sr.

No. 92 CA 1688.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.

September 10, 1992.

Edward T. Diaz, Golden Meadow, for plaintiff-appellant Jervis Autin.

Henry LaFont, Larose, for defendant-appellee Rodney J. Terrebonne, Sr.

Before EDWARDS, SHORTESS, CRAIN, GONZALES, JJ. and COVINGTON[*], J. Pro Tem.

*108 CRAIN, Judge.

In this election contest suit plaintiff, Jervis Autin, appeals from a judgment of the district court which refused to disqualify his opponent Rodney Terrebonne, Sr. as a candidate for election for the seat of the Mayor of the Town of Golden Meadow. La.R.S. 18:1409. Finding no error in the judgment of the lower court, we affirm.

A candidate seeking public office shall possess the qualifications for the office he seeks at the time he qualifies for that office. The sole issue presented for our consideration is whether the trial court erred in finding that Rodney Terrebonne, Sr. was "a qualified elector of the municipality" and "domiciled for at least the immediately preceding year in the municipality." La.R.S. 33:384.

"Domicile" is defined by Louisiana Civil Code, Article 38, as follows:

Art. 38. Domicile, general definition

Art. 38. The domicile of each citizen is in the parish wherein he has his principal establishment.
The principal establishment is that in which he makes his habitual residence; if he resides alternately in several places, and nearly as much in one as in another, and has not declared his intention in the manner hereafter prescribed, any one of the said places where he resides may be considered as his principal establishment, at the option of the persons whose interests are thereby affected.

Residence and domicile are not synonymous, and a person can have several residences but only one domicile. Wilson v. Butler, 513 So.2d 304 (La.App. 1st Cir., 1987). Change in domicile for purposes of qualifying for public office occurs when there is a change in actual residence accompanied by intention to make a new principal home. La.C.C. Arts. 42, 43. Villane v. Azar, 566 So.2d 645, writ denied, 567 So.2d 1108 (La., 1990). This intention may be proved by an express declaration in writing registered in the parishes of the old and new residence or, in the absence of declaration, by the circumstances surrounding the residence. Villane & Azar, id. A person may maintain more than one residence and the fact that one is maintained for political purposes does not itself prevent residence from being actual and bona fide. Williamson v. Village of Baskin, 339 So.2d 474, (La.App. 2nd Cir., 1976), writ denied, 341 So.2d 1126 (La., 1977). In a suit objecting to a candidacy on the ground that the defendant was not qualified to be a candidate because of not having been actually domiciled in the district for one full year preceding the time for qualification, the burden of proof is on the contestant. Slocum v. Dewitt, 374 So.2d 755, writ denied, 375 So.2d 1182 (La., 1979). There is a presumption against change of domicile. Messer v. London, 438 So.2d 546 (La., 1983).

As in any case the factual findings of the trial court will not be disturbed on appeal unless clearly wrong. Villane v. Azar, supra.

In the present case, the record reflects the following circumstances surrounding the defendant's residence and intention:

Mr. Rodney Terrebonne, Sr. testified that he registered as a candidate for mayor on August 20, 1982 and listed his address as 1111-A Bayou Drive in Golden Meadow. This fact was collaborated by Vernon Rodrigue, the Lafourche Parish Clerk of Court.

Mr. Terrebonne and his wife testified that they each were born and raised in Golden Meadow and except, for a six year period spent in New Iberia, they had resided there for their entire life.

Mr. Terrebonne stated that he has two businesses, Domanic Welding (a family corporation) and PT's Welding (a sole proprietorship). These businesses in Golden Meadow involve fixing offshore baskets and boat trailers. The defendant also works in Fourchon, Louisiana on contract to Shell Oil Company. He performs cutting and welding work for them on an average of three to four times per week.

The defendant's children are grown. He and his wife live both in Golden Meadow and Fourchon because of Mr. Terrebonne's work.

*109 In Fourchon, Louisiana, the couple have a fishing camp where they reside 75-80% of the time. The camp is on piers and measures approximately 30 ft. X 30 ft. It has electricity, water and phone service but no mail. It has a furnished kitchen, bath and bedrooms. The Fourchon property was purchased three years ago.

In Golden Meadow the couple originally owned a home at 2211 North Third Street, but it was the subject of a foreclosure in 1987.

The couple, who thereafter went into bankruptcy, then moved to 150 Dursette Street in Golden Meadow where they rented a residence from a friend, Linton Doucet for $150 per month. They moved from here in October, 1990, after the sale of the property.

Thereafter, the couple travelled back and forth between Golden Meadow and Fourchon. In Golden Meadow their business is located on land owned by Mrs. Terrebonne and her family at 1111 North Bayou Drive. At that location there are two additional buildings: a house owned by Mrs. Terrebonne's mother and a wooden building moved to this located by the defendant.

The wooden building is a 25 ft. X 18 ft. It has no water, gas, lights, nor telephone. It does have a bathroom and closet and some flooring, as well as separations. It was used to store family items and was intended to be used in the future, upon completion, as an apartment for the defendant and his wife.

In the interim, pending completion, the couple resided with Mrs. Terrebonne's mother in a separate bedroom of her house. They sometimes stay for a period of one to two weeks at this house. They will continue to stay here until their apartment is completed. This has always been home to Mrs. Terrebonne and she and the defendant expressed their continued intention that Golden Meadow is their "home".

Peggy Caillouet, an employee of the Lafourche Telephone Company, testified that her records indicate that the defendant currently has telephone service in Fourchon, Louisiana, with that service beginning on June 29, 1989. She stated that the service for the defendant in Golden Meadow was from 1971 through August, 1990. She indicated that currently all phone bills are sent to Mr. Terrebonne's Golden Meadow address in care of his business.

Ellen Finger, a parish sanitation manager, testified that her office had no record of sewage service connection for the defendant in Golden Meadow. She did, however, indicate that if the property involved was not the subject of a building permit, that she would not have a record of such service.

Louis Bernard is the Postmaster of Golden Meadow. He testified that a search of his records indicated a post office box in the name of the defendant's son and daughter respectively. He further testified that the son designated the box for himself, his father (i.e., the defendant) and his mother. Additionally, a post office box in the name of Domanic Welding was also designated to receive mail for the defendant and his other business, "PT's Welding".

Ernest Richard of the Lafourche Parish Assessor's office testified that his records did not indicate an assessment on real property in the defendant's name.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State Of Louisiana v. James Bourgeois
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2020
Lestage v. Harris
261 So. 3d 12 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2018)
Succession of January v. January
165 So. 3d 423 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2015)
Succession of John Albert January, Sr.
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2015
Cleveland v. Williams
148 So. 3d 229 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2014)
Viviano v. Bridges
87 So. 3d 1007 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2012)
Opinion
Louisiana Attorney General Reports, 2011
Johnson v. Augustine
943 So. 2d 466 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2006)
Jackson v. Barron
922 So. 2d 728 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2006)
Willa Dean Jackson v. Hershal R. Barrow
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2006
D'Angelo v. D'Angelo
901 So. 2d 607 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2005)
Landiak v. Richmond
899 So. 2d 535 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2005)
Conner v. Allen
872 So. 2d 1091 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2004)
Justin Conner v. Gene T. Allen
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2004
Dominique v. Favorite
854 So. 2d 452 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2003)
Knott v. Angelle
846 So. 2d 825 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2003)
Russell v. Goldsby
780 So. 2d 1048 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2000)
Walsh v. Rogillio
768 So. 2d 653 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
612 So. 2d 107, 1992 WL 373428, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/autin-v-terrebonne-lactapp-1992.