Jacobs v. Timberlake, No. 26-C-184 (2026)

Case details
Full caption
COURTNEY JACOBS v. MICHELLE TIMBERLAKE
Country
United States
Jurisdiction
Louisiana (LA)
Court
Louisiana Supreme Court
Decided
2026
COURTNEY JACOBS v. MICHELLE TIMBERLAKE, Not Reported in So. Rptr. (2026)26-184 (La.App. 5 Cir. 5/12/26) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.12026 WL 1304558UNPUBLISHED OPINION. CHECK COURT RULESBEFORE CITING.Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit.COURTNEY JACOBSv.MICHELLE TIMBERLAKENo. 26-C-184|May 12, 2026Editor's Note: This decision contains discussion of citationreferences that are incorrect or do not actually exist. Theseinvalid citations appeared in the original court opinion andhave been preserved as written since they are part of theofficial record. Any links to these invalid citations have beenremoved.IN RE COURTNEY JACOBS APPLYING FORSUPERVISORY WRIT FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTHJUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF JEFFERSON,STATE OF LOUISIANA, DIRECTED TO THEHONORABLE LEE V. FAULKNER, JR., DIVISION “P”,No. 736-712Panel composed of Judges Fredericka Homberg Wicker, MarcE. Johnson, and Scott U. SchlegelOpinion*1 WRIT DENIED AS MOOT; RULE TO SHOWCAUSE ORDEREDRelator, Courtney Jacobs, seeks review of the trial court'ssetting of a rule to show cause hearing on her “Petition toMake Foreign Orders Executory” and “Application for CivilWarrant Ordering Return of Minor Child Pursuant to CourtOrder.” In her petition, Relator seeks to have custody ordersissued by a Virginia court concerning custody of the minor,B.J., made executory in Louisiana. Relator's application fora civil warrant seeks an order for the immediate return ofB.J. in accordance with the Virginia custody orders. The trialcourt set the rule to show cause hearing for May 12, 2026. Inthe instant writ application, Relator alleges that the trial courterred by setting a hearing, rather than making the Virginiacustody orders executory and enforcing them and delaying thereturn of B.J.A review of the official record shows that a hearing onRelator's petition to make the foreign orders executory andapplication for a civil warrant was held on May 7, 2026,instead of May 12, 2026. On the same date, the trial courtgranted Relator's petition and took the application for a civilwarrant under advisement. On May 12, 2026, the trial courtgranted the application for civil warrant. When consideringRelator's writ application, we find the issues raised have beenmooted through the trial court's rulings. Accordingly, the writapplication is denied as moot.However, we issue the following rule to show cause on ourown motion.On May 8, 2026, Respondent, Michelle Timberlake, fileda “Motion for Extension of Time to File OppositionBrief.” In her motion, Respondent asserts that counsel forRelator, Courtney Jacobs, cited to legal authority in herwrit application that Respondent has been unable to verify.Specifically, Respondent identifies the cited case of Harvey v.Harvey, 13-0253 (La. App. 4 Cir. 10/30/13), 127 So.3d 156,and represents that a search by party name and docket numberdid not locate the cited matter. Respondent further representsthat the docket-number format cited in the application doesnot appear to be consistent with the Fourth Circuit's ordinarynumbering conventions.This Court has likewise been unable to locate or verifywhether Harvey v. Harvey, 13-0253 (La. App. 4 Cir.10/30/13), 127 So.3d 156, exists. After Respondent raisedthis issue, Relator filed a supplemental and amending briefto “correct the citation.” However, the supplemental andamending brief does not explain why Relator removed thecitation to the Harvey case referenced above.Accordingly,IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Counsel for Relator,Camille Patti (Bar Roll Number 38572), show cause by briefonly, to be filed not less than 48 hours from the date of receiptof this Rule to Show Cause Order, or by Monday, May 18,2026, whichever is later,1 why she should not be held incontempt pursuant to La. C.C.P. art. 224(4).*2 IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the briefaddress Relator's citation to Harvey v. Harvey. Counsel for
COURTNEY JACOBS v. MICHELLE TIMBERLAKE, Not Reported in So. Rptr. (2026)26-184 (La.App. 5 Cir. 5/12/26) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.2Relator shall either: 1) produce a copy of Harvey v. Harvey,13-0253 (La. App. 4 Cir. 10/30/13), 127 So.3d 156; or 2)explain the source of the citation and whether the citationis erroneous. Counsel's brief shall also address whetherany generative artificial intelligence tool was used in thepreparation of the instant writ application and, if so, whatsteps Counsel took to verify the existence and validity of thelegal authorities cited therein.Gretna, Louisiana, this 12th day of May, 2026.MEJFHWSUSFIFTH CIRCUIT101 DERBIGNY STREET (70053)POST OFFICE BOX 489GRETNA, LOUISIANA 70054www.fifthcircuit.orgSUSAN M. CHEHARDY CHIEF JUDGEFREDERICKA H. WICKERJUDE G. GRAVOISMARC E. JOHNSONSTEPHEN J. WINDHORSTJOHN J. MOLAISON, JR.SCOTT U. SCHLEGELTIMOTHY S. MARCELJUDGESCURTIS B. PURSELL CLERK OF COURTSUSAN S. BUCHHOLZ CHIEF DEPUTY CLERKLINDA M. TRAN FIRST DEPUTY CLERKMELISSA C. LEDET DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL STAFF(504) 376-1400(504) 376-1498 FAXNOTICE OF DISPOSITION CERTIFICATE OFDELIVERYI CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THE DISPOSITION INTHE FOREGOING MATTER HAS BEEN TRANSMITTEDIN ACCORDANCE WITH UNIFORM RULES - COURTOF APPEAL, RULE 4-6 THIS DAY 05/12/2026 TO THETRIAL JUDGE, THE TRIAL COURT CLERK OF COURT,AND AT LEAST ONE OF THE COUNSEL OF RECORDFOR EACH PARTY, AND TO EACH PARTY NOTREPRESENTED BY COUNSEL, AS LISTED BELOW:CURTIS B. PURSELL CLERK OF COURT26-C-184E-NOTIFIED24th Judicial District Court (Clerk)Hon. Lee V. Faulkner, Jr. (DISTRICT JUDGE)A. Camille Patti (Relator)MAILEDMichelle Timberlake (Respondent), LADavid A. Capasso (Respondent)Attorney at Law650 Poydras StreetSuite 200New Orleans, LA 70130
COURTNEY JACOBS v. MICHELLE TIMBERLAKE, Not Reported in So. Rptr. (2026)26-184 (La.App. 5 Cir. 5/12/26) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.3Olivia Marks (Relator)Attorney at Law1100 Poydras StreetSuite 2900New Orleans, LA 70163Stephen C. D'Antoni (Respondent)Attorney at Law3014 Metairie RoadMetairie, LA 70001All CitationsNot Reported in So. Rptr., 2026 WL 1304558, 26-184(La.App. 5 Cir. 5/12/26)Footnotes1La. C.C.P. art. 225(A) provides, in pertinent part:A person charged with committing a constructive contempt of a court of appeal may be found guilty thereof and punishedtherefor after receiving a notice to show cause, by brief, to be filed not less than forty-eight hours from the date theperson receives such notice why he should not be found guilty of contempt and punished accordingly. The person socharged shall be granted an oral hearing on the charge if he submits a written request to the clerk of the appellatecourt within forty-eight hours after receiving notice of the charge. Such notice from the court of appeal may be sent byregistered or certified mail or may be served by the sheriff.End of Document© 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S.Government Works.
ProvenanceKnow exactly where this document came from.Members see the sourcing behind every authority on DocPost — so you can check the record yourself and cite with confidence.Request access