If you have questions about divorce, legal separation, alimony pendente lite, or alimony in Connecticut, please feel free to call the experienced divorce attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport today at 203-221-3100 or email Joseph C. Maya, Esq. at JMaya@Mayalaw.com.

The Connecticut Appellate Court recently ruled that day care payments were paid as part of a “support order” and were therefore subject to the statutory prohibition against retroactive modification.

Day care payments were subject to the statutory prohibition against retroactive modification in Connecticut General Statutes §46b-86, because they were paid as part of a “support order.”

When the parties divorced in 2002, a child support order provided, “The [plaintiff husband] shall pay to the [defendant wife] as child support the weekly amount of $231.75 which is in accordance with the Child Support Guidelines.” The husband paid child support of $231 per week, which included a contribution toward day care, until June 2013. At that time, he moved to modify and argued that a substantial change of circumstances took place, because the oldest child graduated, neither child required day care and his income decreased. He requested credits for over-payment of both child support and day care. In July 2013, the parties agreed to modify child support to $138 per week, and that became the order of the court. In Nov. 2013, the trial court found that plaintiff overpaid day care in the amount of $23,439 and ordered that he be paid back at the rate of $100 per month.

Defendant wife appealed and argued that the trial court wrongly ordered her to reimburse husband for all payments he had made for day care since 2006. C.G.S. §46b-86(a) provided, “No order for periodic payment of permanent alimony or support may be subject to retroactive modification, except that the court may order modification with respect to any period during which there is a pending motion for modification of an alimony or support order.” If the legislature had intended that only current support would not be subject to retroactive modification, it could have indicated that. The parties’ child “support order” included day care. C.G.S. §46b-86(a), wrote the Appellate Court, “bars any retroactive modification of the order of child care costs because it is an integral part of the overall order of support.”

The Appellate Court reversed the order that defendant pay back day care costs. It also affirmed the trial court’s denial of plaintiff husband’s request for attorney fees.

For a free consultation, please do not hesitate to call the experienced family law and divorce attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport, CT at 203-221-3100. We may also be reached for inquiries by email at JMaya@mayalaw.com.

Source: Farmassony v. Farmassony, 164 Conn. App. 665 (2016).