Russell Maurice Brue v. Le Tu Train Brue

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Russell Maurice Brue v. Le Tu Train Brue

DecidedSeptember 8, 2025

Docket2025 CW 0562

StatusUnknown

This text of Russell Maurice Brue v. Le Tu Train Brue (Russell Maurice Brue v. Le Tu Train Brue) 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

Russell Maurice Brue v. Le Tu Train Brue, (La. Ct. App. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

RUSSELL MAURICE BRUE NO. 2025 CW 0562

VERSUS

LE TU TRAN BRUE SEPTEMBER 8, 2025

In Re: Le Tu Tran Brue, applying for supervisory writs, 22nd Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Tammany, No. 202215936.

BEFORE : LANIER, WOLFE, AND HESTER, JJ. WRIT DENIED.

WIL CHH

Wolfe, J., dissents and would grant the writ and reverse the portion of the district court’s April 23, 2025 judgment ordering the children to attend St. Tammany public schools beginning in the 2025-2026 school year. La. R.S. 9:335(B) (3) provides in pertinent part that “{a]Jll major decisions made by the domiciliary parent concerning the child shall be subject to review by the court upon motion of the other parent. It shall be presumed that all major decisions made by the domiciliary parent are in the best interest of the child.” “The burden of proving they are in fact not in the best interest of the child is placed on the nondomiciliary parent who opposes the decision.” Lawson v. Lawson, 48,296 (La. App. 2d Cir. 7/24/13), 121 So.3d 769, 773. In this matter, defendant, Le Tu Tran Brue, was designated as the domiciliary parent. I find the district court abused its discretion because it did not apply the proper presumption to the domiciliary parent’s decision as to school choice, and plaintiff, Russell Maurice Brue, failed to meet his burden to show the domiciliary parent’s decision was not in the children’s best interest.

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

CLERK OF COURT FOR THE COURT

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

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

RUSSELL MAURICE BRUE NO. 2025 CW 0562

VERSUS

LE TU TRAN BRUE SEPTEMBER 8, 2025

In Re: Le Tu Tran Brue, applying for supervisory writs, 22nd Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Tammany, No. 202215936.

BEFORE : LANIER, WOLFE, AND HESTER, JJ. WRIT DENIED.

WIL CHH

Wolfe, J., dissents and would grant the writ and reverse the portion of the district court’s April 23, 2025 judgment ordering the children to attend St. Tammany public schools beginning in the 2025-2026 school year. La. R.S. 9:335(B) (3) provides in pertinent part that “{a]Jll major decisions made by the domiciliary parent concerning the child shall be subject to review by the court upon motion of the other parent. It shall be presumed that all major decisions made by the domiciliary parent are in the best interest of the child.” “The burden of proving they are in fact not in the best interest of the child is placed on the nondomiciliary parent who opposes the decision.” Lawson v. Lawson, 48,296 (La. App. 2d Cir. 7/24/13), 121 So.3d 769, 773. In this matter, defendant, Le Tu Tran Brue, was designated as the domiciliary parent. I find the district court abused its discretion because it did not apply the proper presumption to the domiciliary parent’s decision as to school choice, and plaintiff, Russell Maurice Brue, failed to meet his burden to show the domiciliary parent’s decision was not in the children’s best interest.

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

CLERK OF COURT FOR THE COURT

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Russell Maurice Brue v. Le Tu Train Brue, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/russell-maurice-brue-v-le-tu-train-brue-lactapp-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack