JAMES MIDDLETON HUGER V STEPHANIE GOLIWAS HUGER (2023)

I would grant and docket this matter to study the factual and legal questions before the Court. Most notably, this matter involves the proper interpretation of La. C.C. art. 113(A), where the former wife of the community alleges that amounts advanced were interim spousal support, not an advance of community property. This Court is called upon to address multiple fact-intensive issues in this matter, including whether the extension of the period set forth in La. C.C. art. 113(A) is for good cause and the proper classifications of the amounts advanced. In such context deference to the district court, which reviewed the analysis and report of a Special Master appointed to this case, is appropriate. See Ross v. Ross, 02-2984, p. 18 (La. 10/21/03), 857 So.2d 384, 395. Accordingly, I would grant and docket to provide an opportunity for thorough review of the record as well as additional time and study of the legal issues before the Court.

Crichton, J., would grant and docket and assigns reasons: