Alimony Sustained Despite Defendant's Cohabitation with Distant Relative
by
Joseph C. Maya on May. 03, 2017
Divorce & Family Law Divorce & Family Law Family Law Divorce & Family Law Child Support
Summary: Blog post about a case where the alimony was disputed by the ex-husband when the ex-wife began co-habitating with another.
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.
Court did not preclude husband from seeking modification of alimony if wife cohabited with distant relative with whom she had romantic relationship; its order that alimony would automatically terminate on her cohabitation with unrelated person pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-86(b) did not mean it considered the relative to be a "related person."
The court dissolved the marriage of the parties on January 6, 2012. The parties shared two minor sons, aged seventeen and twelve. The court entered orders for the plaintiff to pay alimony and child support. These orders provided that: “alimony shall terminate on the earliest of the following: (i) the death of either party; (ii) the remarriage of the defendant; (iii) nine years from the date of dissolution; or (iv) the defendant’s cohabitation with an unrelated person. In addition, the orders set forth that alimony would not terminate in the event that the defendant cohabits with a distant relative during the next three years. The plaintiff argued that the defendant was cohabitating with her distant relative with whom she was romantically involved, and that the court’s prohibition of modification went against state law and policy. The court rejected this claim. The provision did not preclude the plaintiff from seeking a modification upon such cohabitation, but rather pertains to the automatic termination of alimony under such circumstances. The court reasoned that the distant relation and long-time friendship made the relationship an exception to the rule. Therefore, the defendant had not been barred from seeking a modification under this claim.
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: Brown v. Brown, 84 A.3d 905 ; 2014 Conn. App. LEXIS 35 (February 04, 2014)
