164 Conn.App. 266
Conn. App. Ct.2016Background
- Marriage dissolved after ~25 years; dissolution judgment awarded plaintiff two alimony streams: $1,700/week for 12 years (modifiable as to amount) and $400/month for health insurance for 3 years.
- Both parties later moved to modify the $1,700/week award: defendant sought a downward modification; plaintiff sought an upward modification (denied and not appealed).
- At the modification hearing (May 13, 2014), court found changed finances: defendant’s physician income increased (base $275,000/year), plaintiff (an attorney) had opening her own practice and was not realizing income but had earning capacity ~$75,000/year and weekly interest income $640.
- Plaintiff inherited a contingent interest in the Robert F. Hendren trust; at dissolution she had valued it at $1,000,000 (financial affidavit); by the modification hearing the trust had vested and was worth $1,500,000.
- Trial court found the changes in both parties’ circumstances substantial and reduced periodic alimony from $1,700/week to $700/week; plaintiff appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defendant waived right to rely on trust vesting to seek alimony modification | Waiver: marital agreement waived defendant’s claims to the trust, so he cannot use its increased value to reduce alimony | The waiver in the property division simply relinquished corpus rights; it did not preclude later modification motions under § 46b-86 | Court: No waiver of the right to seek modification; waiver provision related to property ownership, not alimony modification |
| Whether vesting/increase in trust value is a proper basis for modification (vs. mere conversion of plaintiff’s asset) | Increase is a conversion/asset increase that plaintiff keeps; it should not be treated as income or a basis for reducing alimony | Vesting/increase is a substantial change in financial circumstances and may be considered when modifying alimony | Court: Vested inheritance/increase can constitute a substantial change permitting modification (citing precedent) |
| Whether court improperly shifted burden to plaintiff by relying on $1M valuation at dissolution | Defendant failed to prove trust value at dissolution; plaintiff’s counsel’s objections should have barred reliance on that valuation | Plaintiff’s financial affidavit at dissolution valued the trust at $1M and plaintiff’s counsel conceded that value at the hearing; court could rely on those sworn affidavits | Court: No improper burden shift; relied on plaintiff’s sworn affidavit and counsel’s concession to establish $1M at dissolution |
Key Cases Cited
- Bartlett v. Bartlett, 220 Conn. 372 (trial court may consider vested inheritance in determining substantial change for alimony modification)
- Gay v. Gay, 266 Conn. 641 (trial court may consider change in property value in assessing substantial change for alimony modification)
- Fulton v. Fulton, 156 Conn. App. 739 (financial affidavits at dissolution are presumptively reliable evidence of value)
- Hardisty v. Hardisty, 183 Conn. 253 (trial court may apply § 46b-82 factors when modifying alimony under § 46b-86)