Legal Articles, General Practice
Courts Permitted to Award Time Limited Alimony for Rehabilitative Purposes
In determining whether alimony should be awarded - as well as the duration and amount of the award - there are several statutory criteria that must be considered. Although these well-settled factors provide courts and litigants with some direction, there is no precise formula, and judges are afforded significant discretion is fashioning support awards. In a recent appellate decision, the Court pointed out that in exercising such discretion, trial judges may consider whether time limited alimony is appropriate merely for rehabilitative purposes in cases where a future event will enable an ex-spouse to become self-sufficient.
Court Awards Wife Alimony in Addition to a Portion of Husband’s Business
It is well recognized that in dissolution actions, a trial court may exercise broad discretion when dividing property and awarding alimony, as long as it considers all relevant statutory criteria. For many reasons, one of which is that a trial judge has the benefit of observing witnesses first hand, an appellate court will not disturb a trial court’s decision unless there has been a clear abuse of discretion.
This of course is a very heavy burden for an appellant to satisfy, but the standard makes sense, and is not insurmountable. That being said, the appellate process presents its own challenges and to the extent an appellate court may exercise its own discretion to arrive at a desired result, it can be relatively unpredictable.
Court Issues $20,000 Monthly Alimony Award in Stamford Divorce
In Cunningham v. Cunningham, Superior Court, Judicial District of Stamford-Norwalk at Stamford, Docket No. FA094017494S (March 9, 2011, Shay, J.), the plaintiff wife and defendant husband were married for approximately twenty-two years, and had two minor children. At the time of the divorce, one child was enrolled in college and the other was in high school. The parties both lived in Stamford, Connecticut and went to court to negotiate an alimony agreement.
Earning Capacity: Alimony and the Invisible Paycheck
Things change. Incomes rise and fall, jobs come and go, marriages last…and some of them do not. In an economy where the only constant is unpredictability, a theme of increasing frequency in divorce litigation is the difficulty in calculating appropriate alimony or child support figures when earning capacity is taken into account. When a breadwinner has fallen on hard times – late in a marriage, during a divorce, or immediately thereafter – and is constrained to take a cut in income, should support figures be based on what he or she now earns, or should they instead be based upon what could be earned given that person’s experience, education, credentials, and marketability?
Relocation: A Concise Summary of Connecticut Law
If you are reading this article, chances are you are interested in relocating with your child, or, would like to prevent your spouse, or ex-spouse, from relocating with your child. The following is meant to serve as a concise explanation of the laws which govern relocation cases in the State of Connecticut. As the analysis employed during divorce proceedings is quite different than the analysis utilized in the post-judgment context, the laws governing each scenario are addressed separately.
Court Enters 10 Year Alimony Award in Wilton Divorce
In Brush v. Brush, Superior Court, Judicial District of Stamford-Norwalk at Stamford, Docket No. FA104019594S (Dec. 15, 2011, Shay, J.), the plaintiff wife and the defendant husband were married for approximately 21 years, and were the parents of two minor children. During the divorce, the children - ages ten and fifteen - resided in the marital home in Wilton, Connecticut pursuant to a bird nesting arrangement which the parties agreed upon as part of an alimony and parenting plan.
Court Awards Primary Residence to Father in Consolidated DCF Case
In a DCF case decision involving both a juvenile case and a proceeding in the family division of the Superior Court, a father was awarded primary residence of his daughter following a substantial change in circumstances. The Department of Children and Families initially became involved in the matter when it filed a neglect petition alleging that the child was being denied proper care and attention, or alternatively, was being permitted to live under conditions injurious to her well-being.
Shortly thereafter, a finding of neglect entered. Prior to the commencement of the DCF proceedings, however, the father filed a motion to modify custody and visitation in the Superior Court. The matters were consolidated and a dispositional hearing was held in the juvenile court.
Court Decides Issue of First Impression Regarding Payment of College Expenses
In a decision, a Connecticut Superior Court addressed an issue of first impression regarding the payment of college expenses, namely whether the Connecticut Superior Courts have the authority to enter an educational support order for a child that has reached the age of majority when entering a child support order for a minor child. The parties in this particular case were married in Chile and had two children before obtaining a divorce (also in Chile) in 1991. The Chilean divorce decree did not contain any provisions regarding child support or the payment of college expenses.
Husband Ordered to Pay Ex-Wife Value of Retirement Portfolio
In a decision, a court ordered a husband to pay to his ex-wife the value of a mutual fund he liquidated after the parties’ divorce. The parties obtained an uncontested divorce in 2011. At the time of dissolution, they each had their own retirement accounts, as well as a mutual fund portfolio which consisted of a retirement fund owned solely by the wife and a non-retirement fund which the parties owned jointly. As a whole, the portfolio was worth approximately $85,000. Although the parties addressed their individually owned retirement accounts in their separation agreement, they did not separately address the jointly owned non-retirement component of the portfolio in question.
In Divorce Actions, “Double Dipping” Analysis Applies to Intellectual Property
In a decision, the Connecticut Appellate Court held that a trial court erred in treating intellectual property as a marital asset subject to division while also awarding the wife a percentage of the income derived therefrom. The parties in this particular case were married in 1992 and were the parents of two children. In the underlying divorce action, the trial court found that although the parties were struggling financially, the husband had published a book from which he was experiencing financial gain.
Legal Articles Additional Disclaimer
Lawyer.com is not a law firm and does not offer legal advice. Content posted on Lawyer.com is the sole responsibility of the person from whom such content originated and is not reviewed or commented on by Lawyer.com. The application of law to any set of facts is a highly specialized skill, practiced by lawyers and often dependent on jurisdiction. Content on the site of a legal nature may or may not be accurate for a particular state or jurisdiction and may largely depend on specific circumstances surrounding individual cases, which may or may not be consistent with your circumstances or may no longer be up-to-date to the extent that laws have changed since posting. Legal articles therefore are for review as general research and for use in helping to gauge a lawyer's expertise on a matter. If you are seeking specific legal advice, Lawyer.com recommends that you contact a lawyer to review your specific issues. See Lawyer.com's full Terms of Use for more information.
