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 court denied the a defendant wife’s appeal, even though the court improperly denied her admission of evidence to the plaintiff’s pre-dissolution earning capacity, because it was irrelevant the plaintiff’s financial capacity for the time period between the modification and dissolution.
The parties’ marriage was dissolved on December 18, 2002. A separation agreement incorporated by the parties granted primary custody of the children to the defendant mother, who would receive child support payments of $2,125 for each of their two children. This amount is in excess of standard child support guidelines, but was found equitable based on the financial circumstances of the plaintiff. On February 1, 2006 the plaintiff filed a motion to modify child support due to a substantial change in financial circumstances. The plaintiff, an interior design wholesaler, claimed that changes in the industry significantly eroded his assets. Since dissolution, his gross monthly income had reduced from $12,500 to $4,000. The defendant sought to introduce the plaintiff’s income during the five year period before the divorce. On denial of this request, the defendant appealed.
The Appellate Court found that the information on the plaintiff’s income during the 5 year period was permissible. Generally, a court is not authorized to re-litigate issues introduced during original dissolution proceedings. However, the wife did not dispute or litigate the plaintiff’s earnings, but rather hoped they may demonstrate the plaintiff’s current earning capacity. The court found this error harmless. The issue at hand concerns modification due to a substantial change in circumstances. The defendant offered no evidence disproving or mitigating the plaintiff’s financial justifications for modification. As a result, the near irrelevance of the defendant's request did nothing to change the final outcome of the matter.
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: Rosier v. Rosier, 928 A.2d 1228 ; 2007 Conn. App. LEXIS 347 (Conn. App. Ct. 2007)
