Foley v. Foley
2013 Conn. App. LEXIS 46
Conn. App. Ct.2013Background
- Marriage of Foley was dissolved in February 2010.
- In October 2011 Foley filed three postjudgment motions for contempt against Joanne Foley.
- First motion alleged Joanne defaulted on the mortgage and increased the loan by over $25,000 without Foley’s permission; court denied, not wilful contempt.
- Second motion alleged child care bills were not related to employment but to Joanne’s schooling; court denied for lack of proof of wilful contempt and suggested a proper modification motion.
- Third motion alleged Joanne brought a child to therapy without Foley’s permission; court denied without prejudice.
- Foley appeals, seeking de novo review; appellate courts must not retry trial court decisions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Should the court review contempt orders de novo? | Foley seeks de novo appellate review. | Foley argues for de novo review of trial court contempt rulings. | No; appellate review is not de novo and the court affirms. |
| Did the trial court properly handle contempt claims and avoid retrial of facts? | Requests new orders and relitigating facts. | ||
| Argues for relief by altering mortgage, halting bills, and ending therapy sessions. | Court cannot retry facts or issue new orders; affirm. | ||
| Was briefing adequate to review the contempt claims? | Standard of review not clearly stated; authorities cited incompletely. | Briefing inadequate; failed to cite standard of review and authorities. | We decline to review for inadequate briefing. |
| Are the orders appealable final orders and properly memorialized? | Orders are final despite being denied without prejudice. | Lack of memorandum of decision and unsigned transcript issues. | Orders were final; even with missing formal documents, appeal proper. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hopfer v. Hopfer, 59 Conn. App. 452 (2000) (appellate review not a retrial or substitution of judgment)
- Mihalyak v. Mihalyak, 11 Conn. App. 610 (1987) (limits on appellate retrial of facts)
- In re Davonta V., 98 Conn. App. 42 (2006) (framework for reviewing contempt appeals)
- Moreira v. Moreira, 105 Conn. App. 637 (2008) (finality and appealability of contempt orders)
- Strobel v. Strobel, 73 Conn. App. 488 (2002) (need for analysis; not abstract assertions)
- Northeast Ct. Economic Alliance, Inc. v. ATC Partnership, 272 Conn. 14 (2004) (requirement of analytical briefing)
- Carabetta v. Carabetta, 133 Conn. App. 732 (2012) (adequacy of briefing and standard of review)