• SC20664 - Tilsen v. Benson: (Dissolution of Marriage, "The principal issue in this appeal requires us to consider the extent to which a Connecticut court may enforce the terms of a ‘‘ketubah,’’ which is a contract governing marriage under Jewish law, without entangling itself in religious matters in violation of the first amendment to the United States constitution.")

• Posted in:
• Family Law,
• Recent Opinions

AC45100 - Anderson-Harris v. Harris (Divorce, "In this appeal, the plaintiff claims that (1) the court improperly rendered judgment in the dissolution action before court-ordered evaluations were completed, (2) the court abused its discretion in issuing certain financial orders, including those related to child support and alimony, and (3) a new trial is necessary because she was unable to provide an adequate record for appellate review as a result of the retirement of the trial judge. We affirm the judgment of the court.")

• Posted in:
• Family Law,
• Recent Opinions

AC45226 - Buchenholz v. Buchenholz (Dissolution of Marriage, "On appeal, the defendant claims that (1) the court abused its discretion when it purportedly amended the plaintiff’s complaint to allege intolerable cruelty, rather than the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, as the ground for dissolution, (2) he did not receive adequate notice that the plaintiff would introduce testimony at trial in support of the purported ground of intolerable cruelty, and (3) the court abused its discretion in awarding alimony to the plaintiff. We affirm the judgment of the trial court."

AC45268 - Pencheva-Hasse v. Hasse (Dissolution of Marriage, On appeal, the defendant claims that the court (1) improperly applied the child support guidelines, (2) abused its discretion in adopting the guardian ad litem’s custody recommendations, and (3) abused its discretion in its property distribution orders.2 We affirm the judgment of the court.

• Posted in:
• Family Law,
• Recent Opinions

SC20710 - Schoenhorn v. Moss (Mandamus, subject matter jurisdiction, justiciability doctrine, "Accordingly, when a plaintiff brings an impermissible collateral attack on another trial court’s sealing order by way of an action for a writ of mandamus, no practical relief can be granted, and the court lacks the competency to adjudicate the matter."

• Concurrence

• Posted in:
• Family Law

AC45242 - Ochoa v. Behling (Child custody, child dependency tax exemption)

"On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the trial court erred ‘‘in adopting [a] prior court order’’ that allowed the defendant, a custodial nonparent, to take certain federal child dependency tax exemptions for the child because the court lacked the authority to do so. In his view, ‘‘states cannot allocate federal tax liability, as doing so is within the exclusive province of the United States Congress.’’ We decline to review the plaintiff’s claim on appeal because it was not raised before the trial court."

• Posted in:
• Family Law

AC45400 - Stevens v. Khalily (“On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court improperly struck counts nine and twelve, which alleged defamation against Shahram and Diana respectively, for failure to plead defamation with the requisite specificity. The plaintiff argues that counts nine and twelve of the operative complaint ‘‘adequately identify the alleged defamatory statements, who made them and to whom they were made, which is what is required of defamation pleadings under Connecticut law and practice.’’ We conclude that the court properly granted the motion to strike counts nine and twelve because the plaintiff has failed to plead reputational harm, an element required to establish a prima facie case of defamation at common law. Because the plaintiff has failed to plead all four elements of defamation, we need not reach the plaintiff’s claim that the court improperly granted the motion to strike on the grounds that he failed to plead the elements of defamation with the requisite specificity. We affirm the judgment of the court.”)

• Posted in:
• Family Law,
• Recent Opinions,
• Tort Law

SC20745 - In re Paulo T. (“This certified appeal arises from the motion of the petitioner mother, Mae T., to reinstate her guardianship rights with respect to her minor child, Paulo T. In the course of its oral decision granting the motion, the trial court stated that parents are entitled to a presumption that reinstatement of guardianship rights is in the best interests of the child. The respondent father, Horace W., appealed from the judgment of the trial court to the Appellate Court, contending, among other things, that this presumption does not apply in cases between two parents. In re Paulo T., 213 Conn. App. 858, 860, 866, 279 A.3d 766 (2022). The Appellate Court agreed with the respondent but nevertheless affirmed the judgment because, after reviewing the record as a whole, it discerned no indication that the trial court had in fact applied the presumption. See id., 866, 877–78, 892. The respondent filed a petition for certification to appeal from the judgment of the Appellate Court, which we granted, limited to the following questions: (1) ‘‘Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that the presumption that reinstatement of guardianship is in the best interest of the child does not apply in cases in which both parties are the parents of the minor child?’’ And (2) ‘‘[d]id the Appellate Court correctly conclude that, notwithstanding the trial court’s statement that a presumption applies, the trial court did not apply the presumption but, rather, correctly applied the proper best interest balancing test?’’ In re Paulo T., 344 Conn. 904, 281 A.3d 460 (2022). Under the circumstances in which this case is presented to us, we need not address the first certified question, and we answer the second question in the affirmative. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Appellate Court.”)

• Posted in:
• Family Law,
• Juvenile Law,
• Recent Opinions

• AC44803 -Netter v. Netter ("In this marital dissolution action, the defendant, Donald Netter, appeals from the trial court’s order on the pendente lite motion of the plaintiff, Stephanie Netter, requesting access to the marital residence to retrieve her personal belongings and from the judgment of the court holding him in contempt for his failure to comply with a provision of the court’s pendente lite parenting plan. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court improperly (1) issued the order permitting access to the marital residence, and (2) granted the plaintiff’s motion for contempt.")

• Posted in:
• Family Law,
• Recent Opinions

The 2023 edition of our research guide on Annulment of Marriages has been posted to our research guides webpage.

• Posted in:
• Family Law,
• FYI,
• Legal Research,
• Self-Help

AC45317 - Prioleau v. Agosta (Application for custody of minor child; "In this contested custody action, the self-represented plaintiff, Keith Prioleau, appeals from the judgment of the trial court awarding him and the defendant, Nitza Agosta, joint legal and physical custody of their minor child, Kayla. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court (1) lacked jurisdiction to grant the defendant's motion to reconsider the court's original judgment or abused its discretion in doing so and (2) abused its discretion in allocating parenting time between the parties. We disagree and, therefore, affirm the judgment of the trial court.")

• Posted in:
• Family Law,
• Recent Opinions

AC44326 - A. D. v. L. D. (In this dissolution matter, the defendant, L. D., appeals from the judgment of the trial court granting a postjudgment motion to modify custody and visitation filed by the plaintiff, A. D. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court (1) violated his fundamental right to family integrity as guaranteed under the constitution of the United States, (2) created a near impossibility that he could ever regain visitation with his children, and (3) violated his federal due process rights by applying an incorrect burden of proof to the plaintiff's motion to modify custody. We affirm the judgment of the court.)

AC45507 - R. H. v. M. S. (The self-represented defendant, M. S., appeals from the judgment of the trial court granting the application for relief from abuse filed by the plaintiff, R. H., her former spouse, pursuant to General Statutes § 46b-15. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court improperly (1) extended the protection of the ex parte restraining order to the parties' children, and (2) found that the defendant had stalked the plaintiff. We agree with the defendant's first claim and, thus, we vacate the ex parte restraining order to the extent that it extended protection to the parties' children. We affirm the judgment of the trial court issuing the one year restraining order.)

AC44693 - Strauss v. Strauss (“The defendant, Mark E. Strauss, appeals from the judgment of the trial court denying his post-judgment motion to vacate a series of orders finding him in contempt for his failure to comply with a separation agreement that he entered into with the plaintiff, Tami G. Strauss, in connection with the underlying judgment dissolving their marriage. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court improperly (1) concluded that it lacked authority to vacate its prior contempt orders, and (2) denied his motion to stay the trial court proceedings during the pendency of this appeal. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.”)

• Posted in:
• Family Law,
• Recent Opinions

The 2023 edition of our research guide on Cohabitation in Connecticut has been posted to our research guides webpage.

• Posted in:
• Family Law,
• FYI,
• Legal Research,
• Self-Help

AC45186 - R. H. v. M. H. (Dissolution of marriage; emergency ex parte order of custody; postdissolution motion to modify custody; "In this custody dispute, the defendant mother, M. H., appeals from the judgment of the trial court granting the postdissolution motion of the plaintiff father, R. H., for modification of custody and access seeking sole legal and physical custody of the parties' two minor children. On appeal, the defendant argues that the court improperly (1) granted the plaintiff's October 30, 2019 application for an emergency ex parte order for custody of the children, (2) delegated its judicial authority by giving the plaintiff decision-making authority over the defendant's access to the children, and (3) infringed on her privacy rights, first by allowing testimony about her medical information and, second, by including her medical information in its November 18, 2021 memorandum of decision without sealing the decision. We agree with the defendant's second claim but disagree with her remaining claims. Accordingly, we reverse in part and affirm in part the judgment of the trial court.")

• AC45186 Concurrence and Dissent - R. H. v. M. H.

• Posted in:
• Family Law,
• Recent Opinions

AC45565 - John Hancock Life Ins. Co. v. Curtin ("On appeal, Curtin and Schalm claim that the court improperly determined that Schalm was not entitled to the insurance proceeds because a provision in the dissolution separation agreement, which required the decedent to maintain certain life insurance designating Schalm as the beneficiary, set forth Curtin’s remedy for the decedent’s failure to maintain such insurance. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.")

• Posted in:
• Family Law,
• Insurance Law,
• Recent Opinions

AC44911 - C. M. v. R. M. (Dissolution of Marriage; Postdissolution motion to relocate; Subject matter jurisdiction; "The defendant father, R. M., appeals from the granting of his postdissolution motion to move to New York City with the parties' two minor children, over the objection of the plaintiff mother, C. M. Despite obtaining the relief requested, the defendant filed the present appeal, claiming that the court improperly concluded that the move to New York City constituted a relocation under General Statutes § 46b-56d and that this determination requires that, in a future proceeding, the defendant satisfy a more difficult burden as compared to a motion to modify the parties' parenting plan filed pursuant to General Statutes § 46b-56. We dismiss the defendant's appeal for lack of aggrievement.")

• Posted in:
• Family Law,
• Recent Opinions

AC44784 - C. D. v. C. D. (Dissolution of marriage; "The defendant, C. D., appeals from the judgment of the trial court dissolving his marriage to the plaintiff, C. D. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court erred in (1) issuing an articulation that is inconsistent with the dissolution judgment and/or a prior articulation, (2) depriving him of notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard with respect to the court's consideration of its pretrial observations of the parties, (3) making clearly erroneous factual findings regarding an incident between the parties, (4) entering custody orders limiting his visitation with the parties' minor children without an evidentiary basis, (5) delegating its judicial authority to nonjudicial entities by authorizing the children's therapeutic counselors to determine whether to provide him with access to the children's private therapy records, and (6) entering a child support award that deviated from the child support guidelines, as set forth in § 46b-215a-1 et seq. of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies (guidelines), without first determining the presumptive support amount pursuant to the guidelines. We conclude that the court committed error only in delegating its judicial authority to nonjudicial entities regarding the children's private therapy records and in entering the child support award. We further conclude that the child support award is severable from the court's other financial orders, although our reversal of the child support award will require the court on remand to reconsider all of the child support orders. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the trial court only as to (1) the order delegating the court's judicial authority to nonjudicial entities regarding the children's private therapy records and (2) the child support orders, and we affirm the judgment in all other respects.")

• Posted in:
• Family Law,
• Recent Opinions

The 2023 edition of our research guide on Parental Kidnapping and Custodial Interference has been posted to our research guides web page.