143 Conn. App. 51
Conn. App. Ct.2013Background
- Defendant Aomo sought to dismiss the Connecticut dissolution action, arguing Kenyan divorce jurisdiction invalidated the Connecticut proceeding.
- Plaintiff Juma commenced the Connecticut dissolution action on October 1, 2009, while the parties and children resided in Connecticut; Kenya divorce proceedings were pursued by Aomo.
- Court found both parties were not domiciled in Kenya; Aomo relinquished Kenyan citizenship, became U.S. domiciled, and Kenyan divorce lacked due process and proper comity.
- Kenya divorce decree did not address child custody, support, alimony, or property division.
- Trial court held evidentiary hearings, applied comity and domicile standards, and concluded jurisdiction lay in Connecticut; judgment dissolving the marriage and addressing assets, support, and custody was entered.
- Court of review affirmed the dissolution judgment and the related orders.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction to dissolve after foreign divorce | Juma contends Connecticut court had jurisdiction | Aomo argues lack of domicile and proper comity | Court had jurisdiction; foreign divorce not controlling |
| Financial and child-related orders worth review | Juma seeks proper alimony, child support, and asset division | Aomo argues no abuse of discretion | No reversible error; court did not abuse discretion |
| Due process and domicile/comity in recognizing foreign proceedings | Juma argues Kenyan process violated due process not recognized | Aomo claims Kenya decree should be recognized | Connecticut properly evaluated domicile and due process; comity not controlling to deny jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- Vogel v. Sylvester, 148 Conn. 666 (Conn. 1961) (divorce status recognized; comity limits)
- Litvaitis v. Litvaitis, 162 Conn. 540 (Conn. 1972) (foreign divorce recognition limits; due process)
- Bruneau v. Bruneau, 3 Conn. App. 453 (Conn. App. 1985) (foreign divorce recognition with comity exceptions)
- Nirookh v. Aburabei, 49 Conn. L. Rptr. 877 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2010) (lack of domicile/due process in foreign divorce)
- Hasbrouck v. Hasbrouck, 195 Conn. 558 (Conn. 1985) (due process notice requirement in divorce)
- Winick v. Winick, 153 Conn. 294 (Conn. 1965) (due process notice in divorce)
- Rice v. Rice, 134 Conn. 440 (Conn. 1948) (domicile definition and intention to reside)
- Smith v. Smith, 174 Conn. 434 (Conn. 1978) (single domicil and abandonment analysis)