187 Conn. App. 375
Conn. App. Ct.2019Background
- Parties married in 2001; three minor children. Divorce judgment (Oct. 23, 2015) incorporated a pendente lite arbitration award resolving many issues but reserved child‑related financial matters to the Superior Court.
- Children entered Saints John and Paul School (private middle school) in fall 2014; parents executed a parenting plan in May 2015 requiring consultation on "major decisions" about education going forward.
- December 7, 2016: after a hearing the trial court allocated educational expenses 75% to defendant (Laurence Kirwan) and 25% to plaintiff (Chelsea Kirwan), retroactive to the dissolution date.
- Plaintiff moved (Jan. 2017) for an order requiring defendant to pay his share of tuition for 2015–2016, 2016–2017, and later 2017–2018; trial court granted the motion (July 17, 2017) and ordered defendant to pay 75% of those years’ tuition, including the 2015–2016 bill incurred before dissolution.
- Plaintiff moved for contempt after defendant largely failed to pay; trial court found defendant willfully in contempt (Feb. 5, 2018), stayed incarceration contingent on partial payment, and awarded plaintiff attorney’s fees. Defendant appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defendant must pay 75% of private middle school tuition for 2015–2016 through 2017–2018 | Kirwan: court order and parenting plan support allocating educational costs 75/25; children were already enrolled before parenting plan so ongoing enrollment not a new "major decision." | Kirwan: parenting plan required consultation on major educational decisions; plaintiff failed to confer, so defendant is not obligated to pay his 75% share. | Court: Affirmed. Enrollment was status quo (begun 2014); parenting plan governs future decisions, so defendant remains responsible for 75%. |
| Whether court could allocate tuition incurred before dissolution (2015–2016) | Kirwan: court may allocate marital liabilities under § 46b‑81 when adjudicating child‑related finances reserved at dissolution. | Kirwan: tuition predated the dissolution date and thus should not be allocated postjudgment. | Court: Affirmed. Under § 46b‑81 the court had authority to allocate marital debt for 2015–2016 because child financial issues were reserved and later adjudicated. |
| Whether July 17, 2017 order was sufficiently clear to support contempt | Kirwan: order clearly required 75% payment for listed years; suggestions about payment plans did not undermine clarity. | Kirwan: court’s suggestion to seek a payment plan created ambiguity about the obligation. | Court: Affirmed. Order was clear and unambiguous that defendant owed 75% for the specified years. |
| Whether defendant’s nonpayment was willful given claimed inability to pay | Kirwan: evidence (accountant testimony, prior income statements) supported finding defendant had ~ $400,000 annual income and failed to prove inability to pay. | Kirwan: defendant claimed inability to pay and that nonpayment therefore was not willful. | Court: Affirmed. Defendant failed to meet burden of proving inability to pay; contempt finding was not an abuse of discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Budrawich v. Budrawich, 156 Conn. App. 628 (2015) (standard of review in domestic relations cases; defer to trial court’s discretion)
- Roos v. Roos, 84 Conn. App. 415 (2004) ( § 46b‑81 grants broad power to allocate liabilities in dissolution)
- Keller v. Keller, 158 Conn. App. 538 (2015) (two‑step review for contempt: order clarity de novo; contempt/willfulness review for abuse of discretion)
- Marshall v. Marshall, 151 Conn. App. 638 (2014) (inability to pay is defense to contempt; burden on obligor)
- Reinke v. Sing, 328 Conn. 376 (2018) (trial court authority to adjudicate postdissolution issues where parties submitted them)
- Smith v. Smith, 249 Conn. 265 (1999) (policy favoring finality of dissolution awards; discussed in relation to postjudgment jurisdiction)
- Dionne v. Dionne, 115 Conn. App. 488 (2009) (standard for clearly erroneous factual findings)
- Jutkowitz v. Dept. of Health Services, 220 Conn. 86 (1991) (settlement negotiation evidence generally inadmissible)
- Schull v. Schull, 163 Conn. App. 83 (2016) (orders related to child support are not automatically stayed on appeal)
- Allen v. Allen, 134 Conn. App. 486 (2012) (award of attorney’s fees in contempt proceedings rests in court’s discretion)