Bunol v. Stockstill — Abuse-of-a-minor claim dismissed with leave to amend

Case
Robert Bunol, Jr. and Stacey Bunol on Behalf of Their Minor Child, H.B. v. Margaret Stockstill
Court
Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit
Judge
THERIOT (appointment info not available); LANIER (appointment info not available)
Date Decided
July 22, 2026
Docket No.
2026 CW 0655
Topics
Abuse of a Minor; No Cause of Action; Pleading; Leave to Amend
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Robert Bunol, Jr. and Stacey Bunol filed suit on behalf of their minor child, H.B., against Margaret Stockstill in Louisiana’s 22nd Judicial District Court for St. Tammany Parish. Their petition included a claim for abuse of a minor under Louisiana Civil Code article 3496.1.

The trial court’s March 13, 2026 judgment overruled Stockstill’s peremptory exception of no cause of action as to that claim. Stockstill sought supervisory review in the Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit.

The Court’s Holding

The First Circuit granted the supervisory writ and reversed the portion of the trial court’s judgment that had overruled the exception. Taking the petition’s allegations as true and viewing them in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, the court held that the petition failed to state a cause of action for abuse of a minor under Louisiana law.

The court granted the peremptory exception as to the abuse-of-a-minor claim, citing Louisiana Civil Code article 3496.1 and Louisiana Children’s Code article 603. It remanded the matter with instructions to give the plaintiffs an opportunity to amend their petition, if they can, to remove the grounds for the objection under Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 934.

Key Takeaways

  • A petition invoking Louisiana Civil Code article 3496.1 must allege facts sufficient to state a legally recognized abuse-of-a-minor claim.
  • On an exception of no cause of action, the petition’s allegations are accepted as true and construed in the plaintiff’s favor.
  • Although the claim was dismissed, the plaintiffs must receive an opportunity to amend if the pleading defect can be cured.

Why It Matters

The decision confirms that citing the provision governing actions for abuse of a minor does not, by itself, establish a viable claim. The pleaded facts must satisfy Louisiana law’s requirements for such a cause of action.

The order also preserves the plaintiffs’ ability to attempt to cure the defect, so the ruling does not necessarily end the abuse-of-a-minor claim permanently.

✉️ 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