211 Conn.App. 628
Conn. App. Ct.2022Background:
- This is an appeal from a June 9, 2021 judgment dissolving the marriage of C.B. (plaintiff) and S.B. (self‑represented defendant).
- The trial court found the defendant’s net weekly income to be $489 and ordered child support of $191 per week.
- The court awarded joint legal custody, with the defendant’s parenting time Tuesday after school (or 11:00 a.m. when not in school) through Thursday morning and every other weekend.
- The defendant appealed, arguing the court abused its discretion in (1) the income finding, (2) rejecting his proposed parenting schedule, and (3) refusing to deviate from the child support guidelines to account for his financial obligations.
- The defendant had filed a pre‑appeal motion to reargue (granted and later denied), but that motion and the court’s decision on it were not before the appellate court; the plaintiff did not file an appellate brief.
- The appellate court affirmed, declining to review the defendant’s substantive claims because his briefing was inadequate.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trial court net weekly income finding | No brief filed | Court erred in finding net weekly income $489 | Declined to review due to inadequate briefing; judgment affirmed |
| Parenting schedule rejection | No brief filed | Court abused discretion by refusing proposed schedule | Declined to review due to inadequate briefing; judgment affirmed |
| Refusal to deviate from child support guidelines | No brief filed | Court should have deviated to reflect defendant’s financial obligations | Declined to review due to inadequate briefing; judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Burton v. Dept. of Environmental Protection, 256 A.3d 655 (Conn. 2021) (explains adequacy of briefing and limits of liberal construction for self‑represented litigants)
- MacDermid, Inc. v. Leonetti, 183 A.3d 611 (Conn. 2018) (requires actual analysis, not mere assertion, in appellate briefs)
- Mattie & O’Brien Contracting Co. v. Rizzo Construction Pool Co., 17 A.3d 1083 (Conn. App. 2011) (minimal citation to authority renders briefing inadequate)
- State v. Buhl, 138 A.3d 868 (Conn. 2016) (briefing that is short, confusing, or disorganized may be inadequate)