"The Exchange" Information Page

title cover

Brought to you by, Marlene Browne, attorney and author of, The Boomer's Guide to Divorce: And a New Life.

The 2002 Connecticut law for COLLEGE and other postsecondary education

Public Act No. 02-128 AN ACT CONCERNING EDUCATIONAL SUPPORT ORDERS, now codified as, Sec. 46b-56c. For a look at how the Connecticut Appellate Court has interpreted this new law (as well as other issues--employment assets, alimony, child support, and how to treat the "girlfriend's" money), read, Sander v. Sander (AC 26291), officially released June 20, 2006.

Relocation after Divorce? What to do?

In the late 1990's, the Connecticut Supreme Court clarified the legal standards that should apply when addressing a removal application in a case called Ireland v. Ireland. In August of 2001, in a case called Murray v. Murray, the appellate court had the occasion to interpret the Ireland case.

More recently, on February 12, 2002, the Connecticut Appellate Court decided how to deal with a case when the petitioner seeks to move out of state at the time of divorce. In Ford v. Ford, the court took an entirely different approach!

Restriction on Grandparents' and Third Party Visitation rights

On January 29, 2002, the Supreme Court of Connecticut decided that the state's Grandparent Visitation Statute--actually, a "third party" visitation statute (see Sec. 46b-59 below)--was unconstitutional as applied by a lower court in the case called, Roth v. Weston, 259 Conn. 202, 789 A.2d 431 (2002). From now on, to obtain third party (which may include a grandparent or sibling) visitation in a matter, you, as the petititioner, must show:
(1) the family has been disrupted in some way, by death of a parent, divorce, or separation,
(2) you must have a parent-like relationship with the child in question,
(3) you must show that the child in question would be harmed, emotionally or physically, if the requested visition were not granted,
(4) you must prove these allegations by "clear and convincing" evidence.

On August 20, 2002, the Connecticut Court of Appeals had the opportunity to apply the holding of Roth v. Weston, in a case called, Clements v. Jones in which it found that the trial court's previous order granting the grandmother's application for visitation was in error.

Sec. 46b-59. Court may grant right of visitation to any person.

The Superior Court may grant the right of visitation with respect to any minor child or children to any person, upon an application of such person. Such order shall be according to the court's best judgment upon the facts of the case and subject to such conditions and limitations as it deems equitable, provided the grant of such visitation rights shall not be contingent upon any order of financial support by the court. In making, modifying or terminating such an order, the court shall be guided by the best interest of the child, giving consideration to the wishes of such child if he is of sufficient age and capable of forming an intelligent opinion. Visitation rights granted in accordance with this section shall not be deemed to have created parental rights in the person or persons to whom such visitation rights are granted. The grant of such visitation rights shall not prevent any court of competent jurisdiction from thereafter acting upon the custody of such child, the parental rights with respect to such child or the adoption of such child and any such court may include in its decree an order terminating such visitation rights.

Dealing with Employment-related assets in divorce

To read how CT courts address the distribution of employment assets in the context of a divorce action see, Wendt v. Wendt, 59 Conn.App. 656, 757 A.2d 1225 (2000).

Click here to see the actual document Jane Welch filed on September 5, 2002. See Jack Welch's own affidavit dated October 29, 2002.

Sec. 46b-81. (Formerly Sec. 46-51). Assignment of property and transfer of title.

(a) At the time of entering a decree annulling or dissolving a marriage or for legal separation pursuant to a complaint under section 46b-45, the Superior Court may assign to either the husband or wife all or any part of the estate of the other. The court may pass title to real property to either party or to a third person or may order the sale of such real property, without any act by either the husband or the wife, when in the judgment of the court it is the proper mode to carry the decree into effect.
(b) A conveyance made pursuant to the decree shall vest title in the purchaser, and shall bind all persons entitled to life estates and remainder interests in the same manner as a sale ordered by the court pursuant to the provisions of section 52-500. When the decree is recorded on the land records in the town where the real property is situated, it shall effect the transfer of the title of such real property as if it were a deed of the party or parties.
(c) In fixing the nature and value of the property, if any, to be assigned, the court, after hearing the witnesses, if any, of each party, except as provided in subsection (a) of section 46b-51, shall consider the length of the marriage, the causes for the annulment, dissolution of the marriage or legal separation, the age, health, station, occupation, amount and sources of income, vocational skills, employability, estate, liabilities and needs of each of the parties and the opportunity of each for future acquisition of capital assets and income. The court shall also consider the contribution of each of the parties in the acquisition, preservation or appreciation in value of their respective estates.

To see how the CT appellate court addressed the issues present in the break up of a forty-year marriage, see, Hartney v. Hartney, released June 29, 2004.

Sec. 46b-82. (Formerly Sec. 46-52). Alimony.

(a) At the time of entering the decree, the Superior Court may order either of the parties to pay alimony to the other, in addition to or in lieu of an award pursuant to section 46b-81. The order may direct that security be given therefor on such terms as the court may deem desirable, including an order pursuant to subsection (b) of this section or an order to either party to contract with a third party for periodic payments or payments contingent on a life to the other party. The court may order that a party obtain life insurance as such security unless such party proves, by a preponderance of the evidence, that such insurance is not available to such party, such party is unable to pay the cost of such insurance or such party is uninsurable. In determining whether alimony shall be awarded, and the duration and amount of the award, the court shall hear the witnesses, if any, of each party, except as provided in subsection (a) of section 46b-51, shall consider the length of the marriage, the causes for the annulment, dissolution of the marriage or legal separation, the age, health, station, occupation, amount and sources of income, vocational skills, employability, estate and needs of each of the parties and the award, if any, which the court may make pursuant to section 46b-81, and, in the case of a parent to whom the custody of minor children has been awarded, the desirability of such parent's securing employment.
(b) Any postjudgment procedure afforded by chapter 906 shall be available to secure the present and future financial interests of a party in connection with a final order for the periodic payment of alimony.

To see how the CT appellate court addressed the contempt issues present when a spouse doesn't pay alimony, postjudgment, see, Dowd v. Dowd (AC26033), released June 13, 2006.

See Generally, Chapter 815j Dissolution of Marriage, Legal Separation & Annulment

More excellent Connecticut legal resources for "Exchange" viewers:


This Web site provides links to information that is already available to the public. No attorney-client relationship is established by your use of this site. See an attorney in your jurisdiction to learn how the cases and court rules and statutes linked here might or might not apply to your matter. Remember, court rules, laws, and cases are always subject to change, so make sure you check with local counsel before doing anything that could compromise your position. And, my book, The Boomer's Guide to Divorce: And a New Life, however generally informative, is not meant to be, nor can it substitute for, personal legal advice in your highly specific matter. As this book describes in detail, the law is always changing, and to make sure you get--or keep--what is rightfully yours; you MUST continually check the law in your state, and get advice tailor-made for the facts of your case (even if it's just one time) from a lawyer licensed to practice in your jurisdiction.


Table of Contents
Media and Photos
Home Page
The Boomer's Guide to Divorce: And a New Life
2004-2015. Marlene M. Browne. All Rights Reserved.