JAMES MIDDLETON HUGER v. STEPHANIE GOLIWAS HUGER (2023)

I dissent because I believe the per curiam is prematurely rendered. This matter involves a fact-intensive question of whether certain assets are properly classified as community or separate. This issue is ordinarily subject to manifest-error standard of review by courts of appeal. Ross v. Ross, 02-2984, p. 18 (La. 10/21/03), 857 So.2d 384, 395. Given the complex nature of the classification question in this matter, together with the significant evidence submitted to the Special Master appointed to this case and, thereafter, to the district court, I believe further study of the record is warranted. I would grant and docket this matter for a thorough review of the record as well as the legal issues before the Court and dissent to the majority ruling by per curiam.

Crichton, J., dissents and assigns reasons: