Because Swede Met State Residency Requirements, Trial Court Had Jurisdiction to Adjudicate Her Divorce Action

by Joseph C. Maya on Mar. 15, 2024

Divorce & Family Law 

Summary: The Appellate Court of Connecticut rejected an appellant husband’s claims that Connecticut courts lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the divorce action brought by the appellee wife.

Case Details

In this case, the parties were married in September 1987 in Stockholm, Sweden. They had three children, including one minor child, and moved to Connecticut in 2002. The wife filed for divorce in February 2009, but withdrew the action in May at the request of the husband, who sought reconciliation. Two months passed before the husband filed a dissolution action in Sweden, at which point the wife and minor child were temporarily living in Sweden for an academic year so the child could become proficient in Swedish.

The husband, who now resided in New Jersey, immediately filed a motion to dismiss, citing lack of jurisdiction by the Connecticut courts, but his motion was denied and the court restored the wife’s initial action. In May 2010, the court dissolved the marriage, and the husband appealed, arguing in part that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the dissolution action because the wife failed to meet the State’s residency requirement.

Dissolving a Marriage

When a party seeks to dissolve their marriage, they must establish residence in this State. General Statutes § 46b-44(a). This statute has been read broadly, and is interpreted to mean that “a party meets the requirements of § 46b-44(a) if the complaint is filed while he or she is a resident of Connecticut.” General Statutes § 46b-44 (c) moves beyond the complaint and focuses on when a court may enter a decree dissolving the marriage.

It requires that one of the parties must be a Connecticut resident for at least twelve (12) months before the complaint was filed or the date the court grants the decree. Our courts have interpreted this language to mean “domicile plus substantially continuous residence in Connecticut.” Domicile, in turn, constitutes residence with the intent of making it the party’s home.

The Decision

In this case, the wife lived in Connecticut since 2002 and initially filed for divorce in February 2009, or six months before she left for Sweden. Therefore, she met the residency requirement for filing the complaint. The husband further argued that his wife abandoned the domicile in Connecticut when she left for Sweden, but the wife countered that she did not intend to remain in Sweden with the minor child.

The court credited her testimony as to numerous pertinent facts: in Connecticut, the wife still had her driver’s license, the child’s schooling, their doctors and dentists, and receipt of mail. Therefore, the court concluded that the wife was domiciled in Connecticut for the twelve months prior to when she filed her complaint, and as such the court had subject matter jurisdiction to enter into adjudicate the matter.


Maya Murphy P.C. has proudly been included in the 2024 Edition of Best Law Firms®, ranked among the top firms in the nation. In addition, Managing Partner Joseph C. Maya has been selected to The Best Lawyers in America® 2024 for his work in Employment Law and Education Law in Connecticut. Recognition in Best Lawyers® is awarded to firms and attorneys who demonstrate excellence in the industry, and is widely regarded by both clients and legal professionals as a significant honor.

Our firm in Westport, Connecticut serves clients with legal assistance all over the state, including the towns of: Ansonia, Beacon Falls, Bethany, Bethel, Branford, Bridgeport, Brookfield, Cheshire, Danbury, Darien, Derby, East Haven, Easton, Fairfield, Greenwich, Guilford, Hamden, Madison, Meriden, Middlebury, Milford, Monroe, Naugatuck, New Canaan, New Fairfield, New Haven, Newton, North Branford, North Haven, Norwalk, Orange, Oxford, Prospect, Redding, Ridgefield, Seymour, Shelton, Sherman, Southbury, Stamford, Stratford, Trumbull, Wallingford, Waterbury, West Haven, Weston, Westport, Wilton, and Woodbridge. In addition to assisting clients in Connecticut, our firm handles education law and employment law matters in New York as well. 

If you have any questions about employment law or education law in Connecticut, or would like to speak to an attorney about a legal matter, please contact Joseph C. Maya and the other experienced attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. at (203) 221-3100 or JMaya@Mayalaw.com to schedule a free initial consultation today.

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.