151 Conn.App. 813
Conn. App. Ct.2014Background
- Married in 1998; one child born in 2000.
- May 2, 2007, dissolution judgment approved relocation of child to Virginia for plaintiff's employment considerations.
- Plaintiff relocated to Virginia in August 2007 and began a new job at Xerox; trial court noted multiple factors supported relocation.
- Defendant filed an amended motion to open alleging fraud, claiming plaintiff failed to disclose Lexmark employment status post-judgment.
- Trial court denied the motion to open on January 28, 2013, and held the alleged non-disclosure did not constitute fraud.
- Appellate Court affirmed the judgment, incorporating analysis that Weinstein/Billington do not support a continuing duty to disclose during appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether in-chambers/off-record hearing tainted the motion to open | Lederle argues proper record warranted review | Spivey contends in-chambers discussion occurred and requires scrutiny | Claim not reviewable due to an inadequate record |
| Whether the motion to open based on alleged fraud requires sworn testimony | Lederle claims fraud evidence existed and should be examined | Spivey asserts no continuing duty to disclose after judgment | Court affirmed denial; no fraud found; continuing-disclosure duty not supported by Weinstein/Billington |
Key Cases Cited
- Weinstein v. Weinstein, 275 Conn. 671 (2005) (continuing duty to disclose financial information until judgment is final)
- Billington v. Billington, 220 Conn. 212 (1991) (establishes continuing duty to disclose pertinent financial information)
- McCarthy v. Cadlerock Properties Joint Venture, L.P., 132 Conn. App. 110 (2011) (review of motion to open limited by record; standard of review)
- Kalas v. Cook, 70 Conn. App. 477 (2002) (correct outcome upheld on alternative grounds when grounds insufficient)