Case Law Norton v. Norton

Norton v. Norton

Document Cited Authorities (24) Cited in (7) Related

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT, KRISTIN USNER NORTON Phillip A. Wittmann, Brooke C. Tigchelaar

DEFENDANT/APPELLEE, TAYLOR MONTGOMERY NORTON In Proper Person

Panel composed of Judges Susan M. Chehardy, Fredericka Homberg Wicker, and Marc E. Johnson

CHEHARDY, C.J.

In this domestic dispute, plaintiff, Kristin Usner Norton ("Kristin"), appeals the trial court's January 4, 2021 judgment in favor of defendant, Taylor Montgomery Norton ("Taylor"), granting him an immediate divorce pursuant to La. C.C. art. 103(4), having found that Kristin physically abused him during the marriage. For the following reasons, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Kristin Norton and Taylor Norton were married on December 27, 2003, in New Orleans, Louisiana, and made their home in Jefferson Parish (Metairie). Four children were born of the marriage; namely, Taylor Montgomery Norton, II ("T2"), Graham Sidney Norton, Addison Eileen Norton, and Alexis Estelle Norton. On January 2, 2020, Kristin filed a petition for divorce and ancillary matters, requesting a no-fault divorce pursuant to La. C.C. art. 102, on the basis that she intended to live separate and apart from Taylor for the requisite amount of time (a period in excess of 365 days) before obtaining this divorce. Taylor filed an answer and reconventional demand on January 23, 2020, also seeking a divorce from Kristin under the provisions of La. C.C. art. 102. In their respective pleadings seeking a no-fault divorce, each party alleged that other spouse was guilty of fault in the breakup of the parties’ marriage, yet neither party set forth the specific conduct constituting the other spouse's alleged fault.

On April 29, 2020, Taylor filed an amended and supplemental reconventional demand seeking an immediate divorce pursuant to La. C.C. art. 103(4), alleging that Kristin physically abused him during the marriage. In particular, Taylor identified two instances that occurred, one on September 24, 2019, and the other on December 24, 2019, where he claims he was physically abused by Kristin.

A hearing on the merits of Taylor's demand for a La. C.C. art. 103(4) divorce was held before the trial court on December 29, 2020. Three witnesses testified at the hearing: Troy Norton, Taylor Norton, and Kristin Norton.

Testimony of Troy Norton

Troy Norton, Taylor's brother, testified that during the early hours of December 25, 2019, he received a call from Kristin wherein she told him that she and Taylor had gotten into an argument and she was afraid that Taylor was going to call the police. Kristin asked Troy if she could come to his house because she had nowhere else to go. According to Troy, when Kristin arrived at approximately 12:30 a.m., her intoxication "was very obvious," as she was "stumbling a little bit ... and she was very emotional" and "mumbling her words." Troy explained that the extended family had gathered earlier that evening at his parents’ home for a Christmas Eve celebration, where both Kristin and Taylor had been drinking.

Troy testified that Kristin remained at his home for approximately an hour and a half. While there, Kristin told Troy that she and Taylor had been arguing in front of the kids and that "she struck [Taylor]" after becoming angry at something he said. Kristin told him that after the argument, Taylor called the police, who were on their way to the Nortons’ house, and she left because she did not want to get arrested. Troy testified that when it came time for Kristin to leave, he and his wife sent Kristin home in an Uber because they believed she was too intoxicated to drive. He later sent Kristin a text to make sure that she was all right. According to Troy, Kristin made no mention to him that Taylor had abused her in any way, that Taylor was the aggressor, that Taylor had attempted to have sex with her, or that Taylor had attempted to rape her in any fashion.

Troy testified that when he spoke to Taylor in the following days, he told Taylor about Kristin having admitted to him that she physically struck Taylor during the Christmas Eve argument. He stated that Taylor later showed him photographs of his arms, which Troy testified showed scratches and claw marks consistent with the injuries Taylor had previously described as having been inflicted by Kristin during the argument. Troy stated that during previous discussions, Taylor told him about other instances where Kristin was intoxicated, an argument ensued, and Kristin had physically hit or slapped him. According to Troy, Kristin never attempted to defend her actions to him by stating that she was acting in self-defense or that she accidentally struck Taylor. To the contrary, Kristin specifically told Troy that she struck Taylor on "purpose because she was provoked by some of his words spoken [not by some physical action by Taylor] in front of the children."

Troy conceded on cross-examination that once Kristin filed for divorce in January 2020, he called her to tell her that he was sad that her marriage to Taylor was ending. He stated that over the past several years, he had observed Taylor and Kristin arguing more frequently and "when that happened it was usually as a result of their intoxication." He stated that on separate occasions, both Kristin and Taylor expressed concern to him about the other's drinking alcohol to excess. Troy stated that Taylor also conveyed to him his concern regarding Kristin's use of the drug, Lexapro, especially when she drank alcohol while also taking the drug.

Troy testified that while he never personally witnessed Kristin inflicting physical abuse upon Taylor, in addition to telling Troy about Kristin's physical abuse on Christmas Eve, Taylor did describe to him previous instances where he was physically abused by Kristin, which mostly occurred during arguments where Kristin was intoxicated. Troy also recalled that Taylor complained to him on multiple occasions that he was tired of Kristin physically abusing him and "behaving that way." Troy testified that, based on his prior discussions with Taylor, he believed that Kristin's use of Lexapro, Taylor's suspicion of Kristin's infidelity, and Kristin's physical abuse of Taylor when she was intoxicated, were all "contributors" to Taylor's filing the amended and supplemental reconventional demand seeking a fault-based divorce from Kristin.

Regarding the alleged altercation that took place between Taylor and Kristin on September 24, 2019, Troy testified that he had no knowledge or recollection of the incident.

Testimony of Taylor Montgomery Norton

At the hearing, Taylor explained that while he initially filed for a reconventional demand seeking a La. C.C. art. 102 divorce, because there was not going to be a reconciliation between the parties, he filed for the La. C.C. art. 103(4) divorce because he could obtain a divorce sooner. He testified that he was not going to return to a relationship where he was being physically abused, and that he wanted a divorce "sooner rather than later."

Taylor testified that Kristin physically abused him on multiple occasions during their marriage. He claimed that "[s]he had a tendency to become irate and [they] would get into word matches and whenever [Kristin] felt like she couldn't get her words to mend, then she would [physically] lash out" at him. According to Taylor, Kristin would typically claw at and/or slap his face and, occasionally, his arms. Kristin also often cursed at him, which only seemed to be getting progressively worse over time, particularly with her use of Lexapro. Taylor testified that he finally reached the point that he did not want Kristin to abuse him anymore, especially in front of the children. Taylor denied that he ever physically or verbally abused Kristin.

With regards to the final physical altercation between the parties that occurred on December 24, 2019, Taylor stated that he, Kristin, and the children had previously been at a Christmas Eve celebration at his parents’ home. Although he had been drinking that evening, he did not believe he was intoxicated or even had a "buzz," but testified that Kristin was "on her way [to] being intoxicated" because she was stumbling and slurring her speech. Taylor testified that they arrived home from the party between 11:00 and 11:30 p.m. After putting cookies and milk out for Santa, and putting the children to bed, he and Kristin went to their bedroom. He asked Kristin if she wanted to be intimate; she did not. According to Taylor, Kristin walked out of their bedroom into the boys’ room, and crawled into bed with their eldest son, Taylor (also referred to as "T2"). Taylor claimed that when he was near the boys’ room, he could hear Kristin talking negatively about him to T2, including telling T2 that Taylor was a horrible person. Taylor stated that he proceeded into the boys’ room, and when he attempted to tell T2 to "relax [and] go to sleep" and that it was "all going to be okay," Kristin became irate and physically attacked him. Taylor explained that as he leaned into T2 and attempted to put his arm around him, Kristin "reach[ed] out [and] grab[bed his] face ... with her claws ..." She then dug her fingernails into his arms with such force that he could not pull his arms away. According to Taylor, Kristin grabbed and clawed him in front of T2, who was next to her on the top bunk, and Graham, who was in the bottom bunk. According to Taylor, when he was able, he backed away and told Kristin that he was "not taking this anymore."

Taylor testified that because Kristin was intoxicated and irate, and he believed things would only escalate if she did not calm down, he called the police thinking they would be able to stop her escalating erratic behavior. Once Taylor called the police, however, Kristin became even more irate, and left the house. Taylor explained that while ...

2 cases
Document | Court of Appeal of Louisiana – 2021
Tuckerson v. Amtrust Ins. Co.
"..."
Document | Court of Appeal of Louisiana – 2022
Welch v. United Med. Healthwest-New Orleans, L.L.C.
"...party raising an affirmative defense has the burden of proving it by a preponderance of the evidence. See Norton v. Norton , 21-212 (La. App. 5 Cir. 12/22/21), 335 So.3d 371, 386. The Louisiana Health Emergency Powers Act (LHEPA) provides that during a state of public health emergency, no h..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
2 cases
Document | Court of Appeal of Louisiana – 2021
Tuckerson v. Amtrust Ins. Co.
"..."
Document | Court of Appeal of Louisiana – 2022
Welch v. United Med. Healthwest-New Orleans, L.L.C.
"...party raising an affirmative defense has the burden of proving it by a preponderance of the evidence. See Norton v. Norton , 21-212 (La. App. 5 Cir. 12/22/21), 335 So.3d 371, 386. The Louisiana Health Emergency Powers Act (LHEPA) provides that during a state of public health emergency, no h..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex