Brue v. Brue — affirmed joint custody and expense rulings but ordered support recalculated using the father’s earning potential

Case
Russell Maurice Brue v. Le Tu Tran Brue
Court
Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit
Judge
Theriot; Greene; Edwards
Date Decided
Not specified
Docket No.
2026 CU 0343
Topics
Child Custody; Child Support; Spousal Support; Family Violence
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Russell Maurice Brue and Le Tu Tran Brue, identified in the opinion as Russell and Julie, divorced after Julie discovered that Russell, then a Louisiana State Police officer, had engaged in an extramarital affair. The State Police terminated Russell after an internal investigation found misconduct connected to the affair, including conduct committed while he was on duty. Julie alleged that Russell had abused her and their two children, while Russell denied those allegations.

After a bench trial on custody and support issues, the district court awarded the parents joint custody, designated Julie as domiciliary parent, and declined to apply Louisiana’s Post-Separation Family Violence Relief Act. It also addressed private-school tutoring tuition, ordinary medical expenses, child support, and interim spousal support. Julie appealed those rulings.

The Court’s Holding

The Court of Appeal affirmed the rulings on tuition reimbursement, ordinary medical expenses, and custody. The district court had discretion to deny reimbursement for the children’s 2023-2024 Holy Family Academy tuition, and it properly assigned Julie, as domiciliary parent, responsibility for unreimbursed ordinary medical expenses up to $250 per child per year. Giving deference to the district court’s credibility findings, the appellate court also upheld joint custody because the record supported the finding that Julie had not proved a history of family violence warranting application of the statutory protections she invoked.

The court reversed the child-support ruling because the district court manifestly erred by failing to find Russell voluntarily underemployed after his State Police termination. His job loss resulted from his own voluntary misconduct, including on-duty sexual misconduct and related policy violations, so his earning potential as an officer could be imputed when calculating child support. Because the interim-spousal-support calculation relied partly on the erroneous child-support amount, the court reversed that ruling as well and remanded for recalculation of both awards using Russell’s earning potential.

Key Takeaways

  • A parent discharged because of voluntary workplace misconduct may be treated as voluntarily unemployed or underemployed for child-support purposes.
  • Private-school expenses may be added to a child-support obligation, but reimbursement is discretionary rather than mandatory.
  • The appellate court upheld joint custody and declined to apply the Post-Separation Family Violence Relief Act because the district court’s credibility-based finding that no history of abuse was proved was not manifestly erroneous.

Why It Matters

The decision illustrates that a parent ordinarily cannot reduce a child-support obligation by relying on diminished income caused by the parent’s own misconduct. Courts may instead calculate support from earning potential.

It also shows the deference Louisiana appellate courts give trial judges on custody and abuse allegations when the ruling turns on witness credibility, while treating the proper application of support statutes as independently reviewable.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top