Reference to CT Statute Fails to Incorporate Judicial Authority
by
Joseph C. Maya on May. 05, 2017
Divorce & Family Law Divorce & Family Law Child Support Divorce & Family Law Family Law
Summary: Blog post about alimony awards and how courts determine them.
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.
Connecticut court found an ex-husband was entitled to termination of unallocated spousal support upon his ex-wife’s cohabitation with her fiancé, because the parties’ unambiguous separation agreement provided no other remedy, such as suspension, to the trial court., The agreement’s use of “define” limited scope of reference to Connecticut General Statute §46b-86(b) and did not include any of the statute’s remedial aspects.
The parties married on July 4, 1999. On February 21, 2007, the court, incorporating by reference the terms of the separation agreement, entered a judgment dissolving the parties’ marriage. Section 3(B) of this agreement provides: “unallocated alimony and child support shall be paid until the death of either party, the plaintiff’s remarriage, or cohabitation as defined by §46b-86(b).”
The plaintiff argued that §46b-86 (b) allowed the trial court to make modifications to alimony, rather than an outright cessation. The Connecticut Supreme court ruled that the language of the separation agreement was unambiguous in its limited reference of “define” to §46b-86b, and that the authority granted by the statute was not in itself allocated in the contractual agreement.
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: Nation-Bailey v. Bailey, 112 A.3d 144, (Conn. 2015)
