Louisiana Child Custody Agreement
Louisiana puts the parents' agreement in the opening sentence of its custody article and names only two things that can displace it.
Find out where you stand in Louisiana
Where are you with the custody arrangement?
DocDraft provides document preparation, not legal advice.
Introduction
Louisiana writes the parents' agreement into the first sentence of its custody article. Louisiana Civil Code article 132 provides that if the parents agree who is to have custody, the court shall award custody in accordance with their agreement unless the provisions of La. R.S. 9:364 apply or the best interest of the child requires a different award. Only where there is no agreement, or where the agreement is not in the child's best interest, does the article move on to joint custody as the default and to the clear and convincing evidence a parent needs to obtain sole custody over the other parent's objection. Agreement is therefore the article's first branch rather than an exception to one, and the verb is shall award. That does not make the document self-executing: the court still measures the arrangement against the fourteen best interest factors in article 134, and where joint custody is decreed it must also render a joint custody implementation order under La. R.S. 9:335. Louisiana also adds a role most states have no name for, the domiciliary parent, who by default holds authority to make all decisions affecting the child unless the implementation order says otherwise.
Key Things to Know
- 1
Agreeing changes the court's instruction, not just its mood. Louisiana Civil Code article 132 directs that if the parents agree who is to have custody, the court shall award custody in accordance with their agreement, subject to two named exceptions: the family violence provisions of La. R.S. 9:364, and the court's own judgment that the best interest of the child requires a different award. Nothing in the article assigns a burden or an evidentiary threshold to that second exception.
- 2
There is an asymmetry in article 132 worth understanding. A court departing from what both parents proposed needs only to conclude that the child's best interest requires a different award. A parent asking for sole custody over the other parent's objection, by contrast, must show it by clear and convincing evidence. The heavier proof burden sits on the contested branch, not on the agreed one.
- 3
The agreement is not an order until the court makes it one. Article 132 works by the court awarding custody in accordance with the agreement, and an agreement reached in mediation follows an express route: under La. R.S. 9:332(B) the mediator prepares a written, signed and dated agreement, and a consent judgment incorporating it is submitted to the court for its approval. Parents cannot contract away the court's authority over a child.
- 4
Louisiana has a role most states do not. Under La. R.S. 9:335(B)(1) the court in a joint custody decree shall designate a domiciliary parent except when there is an implementation order to the contrary or for other good cause shown. That parent is the one with whom the child primarily resides and, under (B)(3), has authority to make all decisions affecting the child unless the implementation order provides otherwise, with each major decision reviewable on the other parent's motion. Louisiana's joint custody is not symmetrical by default, and the implementation order is what changes that.
- 5
The plan is the court's document, not a filing the parents owe. La. R.S. 9:335(A)(1) provides that in a proceeding in which joint custody is decreed, the court shall render a joint custody implementation order except for good cause shown, and no statute requires parents to draft or file a plan of their own. The order is where the arrangement lives, allocating the time periods of physical custody, allocating the legal authority and responsibility of the parents, addressing evacuation with the child during a declared emergency or disaster, and setting physical custody to be shared equally under 9:335(A)(2)(b) unless the court determines that is not feasible or not in the best interest of the child. Child support is calculated separately and is not settled by a custody arrangement.
- 6
Article 134 lists fourteen factors, and the first one leads. La. Civ. Code art. 134(A)(1) is the potential for the child to be abused, which the article makes the primary consideration, with thirteen further factors following it. The list is open, since the article directs the court to consider all relevant factors including those listed, and two of them carry qualifications: evidence that an abused parent suffers from the effects of past abuse is not grounds for denying that parent custody, and the friendly-parent factor is disapplied where objectively substantial evidence of abusive, reckless or illegal conduct has given one parent reasonable concerns for the child's safety.
- 7
Family violence overrides the agreement, and it switches the factor list off. La. R.S. 9:364(A) creates a presumption that no parent with a history of perpetrating family violence shall be awarded sole or joint custody, rebuttable only on all three of the findings in 9:364(B). La. Civ. Code art. 134(B) provides that where there is a history of family violence or domestic abuse, the court decides custody and visitation under La. R.S. 9:341 and 9:364 rather than on the fourteen factors, and 9:341(A) makes supervised visitation mandatory on a preponderance finding. Because 9:364 is one of the two exceptions written into article 132, an agreement cannot route around it, and this is a situation to raise with a lawyer rather than settle on a form.
Key decisions before you file
Before you file a Child Custody Agreement in Louisiana, a few decisions shape the document: which option to choose and what each one means. The Child Custody Agreement guide walks through them.
Open the Child Custody Agreement guideCustomize your Child Custody Agreement Template with DocDraft
Louisiana Requirements for Child Custody Agreement
If the parents agree who is to have custody, the court shall award custody in accordance with their agreement. The document should state plainly that the parents agree on custody and identify the arrangement, so the court is applying the first branch of the article rather than the default rules that follow it.
The court may make a different award where the provisions of La. R.S. 9:364 apply or where the best interest of the child requires it. No burden of proof or evidentiary standard attaches to the best interest exception, which is a lighter constraint than the clear and convincing evidence required for sole custody over a parent's objection.
Fourteen factors govern the best interest determination, beginning with the potential for the child to be abused, which the article makes the primary consideration. The list is open, so a court may weigh other relevant matters. An arrangement that speaks to these factors is easier for a court to assess.
Where there is a history of committing family violence or domestic abuse, including sexual abuse, the court determines custody and visitation under La. R.S. 9:341 and 9:364 rather than on the fourteen factors, whether or not a party has sought relief under any applicable law. A parental agreement does not switch this off.
In a proceeding in which joint custody is decreed, the court shall render a joint custody implementation order except for good cause shown. The duty runs to the court rather than the parents, so no separate parenting plan filing is required, but the parents' terms should be drafted so they can be carried into the order.
The order allocates time periods of physical custody assuring frequent and continuing contact with both parents, sets equal sharing of physical custody unless the court finds that is not feasible or not in the child's best interest, provides for evacuation with the child during a declared emergency or disaster with continuous communication and an interim custody plan, and allocates the legal authority and responsibility of the parents.
The court designates a domiciliary parent in a joint custody decree except where the implementation order provides to the contrary or for other good cause shown. That parent has authority to make all decisions affecting the child unless the implementation order provides otherwise, so parents who want shared decision-making should say so expressly in the document.
Joint custody obligates the parents to exchange information concerning the health, education and welfare of the child and to confer with one another in exercising decision-making authority. This duty applies independently of the implementation order, and the document should set out how and how quickly information is exchanged.
Where an agreement is reached in mediation, the mediator prepares a written, signed and dated agreement, and a consent judgment incorporating it shall be submitted to the court for its approval. A mediated custody agreement does not bind on signature alone.
Notice of a proposed relocation of the child's principal residence is due no later than the sixtieth day before the move, by registered or certified mail with return receipt requested or by commercial courier, containing the eight items listed in 9:355.5(B), with a thirty-day window to object under 9:355.7. An express written agreement for the relocation makes the relocation Subpart inapplicable, though R.S. 9:355.2 carries an amendment effective January 1, 2027, so check the current text.
Frequently Asked Questions
It puts you in the first branch of the custody article rather than the second. Louisiana Civil Code article 132 opens by providing that if the parents agree who is to have custody, the court shall award custody in accordance with their agreement, unless the provisions of La. R.S. 9:364 apply or the best interest of the child requires a different award. The rest of the article, including joint custody as the default and the clear and convincing standard for sole custody, applies only in the absence of agreement or where the agreement is not in the child's best interest.
Yes. Article 132 operates through a court award, so the agreement carries legal force once the court awards custody in accordance with it, not before. An agreement reached in mediation has an express path: La. R.S. 9:332(B) provides that the mediator prepares a written, signed and dated agreement and that a consent judgment incorporating it shall be submitted to the court for its approval. Approval is also what makes the arrangement enforceable if the other parent stops following it.
Yes, and article 132 names the two grounds in the same sentence that directs the court to follow the agreement. The court may make a different award if the provisions of La. R.S. 9:364 apply, meaning the family violence presumption, or if the best interest of the child requires a different award. The article states no burden of proof and no evidentiary threshold for that second ground, which is a lighter constraint than the clear and convincing evidence a parent must produce to obtain sole custody over the other parent's objection.
It is a role Louisiana defines that most states have no equivalent for. Under La. R.S. 9:335(B)(1) the court in a joint custody decree shall designate a domiciliary parent except when there is an implementation order to the contrary or for other good cause shown. La. R.S. 9:335(B)(2) describes that parent as the one with whom the child shall primarily reside, while the other parent shall have physical custody during time periods that assure the child frequent and continuing contact with both parents. Under (B)(3) the domiciliary parent has authority to make all decisions affecting the child unless the implementation order provides otherwise, and each major decision is subject to review by the court on the other parent's motion.
It is the instrument that carries out a joint custody decree. La. R.S. 9:335(A)(1) provides that in a proceeding in which joint custody is decreed, the court shall render a joint custody implementation order except for good cause shown. The order allocates the time periods during which each parent has physical custody so that the child is assured frequent and continuing contact with both parents, allocates the legal authority and responsibility of the parents, addresses evacuation with the child during a declared emergency or disaster, and designates a domiciliary parent. The duty to render it belongs to the court, so parents are not separately required to file a plan of their own.
La. R.S. 9:335(A)(2)(b) sets equal sharing as the starting point inside the implementation order: unless the court determines that it is not feasible or not in the best interest of the child, physical custody shall be shared equally. The qualification is doing real work, since distance, school, work schedules and the child's needs all feed the feasibility and best interest questions. An arrangement that is not an equal split is worth explaining in the document rather than leaving the court to infer the reason.
La. Civ. Code art. 134(A) lists fourteen factors, and the first is the potential for the child to be abused, which the article designates the primary consideration. The list is not closed, because the article directs the court to consider all relevant factors including those listed. Two of the factors carry limits that matter: evidence that an abused parent suffers from the effects of past abuse by the other parent is not grounds for denying that parent custody, and the factor about a parent facilitating a relationship with the other parent does not apply where objectively substantial evidence of abusive, reckless or illegal conduct has given one parent reasonable concerns for the child's safety.
A different body of law takes over. La. R.S. 9:364(A) creates a presumption that no parent with a history of perpetrating family violence shall be awarded sole or joint custody, and 9:364(B) allows it to be rebutted only on all three of the findings that subsection lists, including completion of a court-monitored domestic abuse intervention program. La. Civ. Code art. 134(B) provides that where there is a history of family violence or domestic abuse, the court determines custody and visitation under La. R.S. 9:341 and 9:364 instead of on the fourteen factors, and 9:341(A) requires supervised visitation only, on a preponderance finding. Because 9:364 is one of the two exceptions named in article 132, an agreement cannot displace it, and this is a situation for a lawyer.
La. R.S. 9:355.5(A)(1) requires notice of a proposed relocation of the child's principal residence no later than the sixtieth day before the move, sent by registered or certified mail with return receipt requested or by commercial courier, and 9:355.5(B) lists eight items the notice must contain, including the proposed new address, the date, the reasons, and a proposed revised custody or visitation schedule. A person entitled to object has thirty days from receipt to object in writing under 9:355.7. La. R.S. 9:355.10 places the burden on the relocating parent to prove the move is made in good faith and is in the child's best interest, decided on the twelve factors in 9:355.14(A). Whether a particular move is covered turns on the applicability rules in La. R.S. 9:355.2, which carry an amendment effective January 1, 2027, so check the current text before assuming a move is or is not caught.
Yes, and this is one of the few places Louisiana gives a bare written parental agreement direct legal effect. La. R.S. 9:355.2(C)(1) provides that the relocation Subpart does not apply where the person required to give notice and the persons entitled to object have entered into an express written agreement for the relocation of the child's principal residence. No judgment is needed for that provision to operate. R.S. 9:355.2 carries an amendment effective January 1, 2027, so confirm the current text before relying on it. Custody itself is different: the arrangement still becomes enforceable only through a court award.