163 Conn.App. 837
Conn. App. Ct.2016Background
- Marriage dissolved March 17, 2011; parties shared joint legal custody; child lived primarily with Gina Michaels; Thomas Michaels had visitation and child support/payment obligations.
- Plaintiff (Gina) filed postjudgment motions: a contempt motion (May 2013) for unpaid child-related expenses and a motion to modify parenting plan/vesting of final decision-making (May 2013).
- Parties repeatedly agreed to temporary modified parenting schedules and engaged family relations mediation throughout 2013–2014; mediation repeatedly continued and ultimately failed.
- April 1, 2014: parties compromised the contempt claim—Thomas to file 2013 tax return and pay $1,500 (or $100/month if no refund); the agreement was ordered by the court.
- June–September 2014 hearings: court found Thomas in contempt for failing to pay $100/month; court held evidentiary proceedings on visitation after mediation failed and modified Thomas’s visitation; Thomas moved to recuse/disqualify, for mistrial, and to vacate, arguing judicial bias and lack of notice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trial judge’s denial of recusal/disqualification, mistrial, vacatur (bias) | Plaintiff: record insufficient to review; defendant failed to preserve adequate record under Practice Book provisions | Judge biased and partial during August hearings; motions should have been granted | Court: record inadequate for review because trial court gave no written ruling or signed transcript and defendant failed to seek articulation or file required notice; claim not reviewable on appeal |
| Adequacy of record for appellate review | Plaintiff: appellant bears duty to supply adequate record per Practice Book; defendant did not comply | Defendant claims bias is obvious from transcript and proceedings | Court: appellant failed to comply with Practice Book § 64-1 and § 66-5; transcripts do not contain trial court’s factual/legal basis, so appellate review is speculative |
| Modification of visitation — notice and pending motion | Plaintiff: modification arose from existing motion to modify and ongoing proceedings/mediation; defendant had notice from repeated continuances and filings | Defendant: no viable pending motion or notice of adjudication; entitled to fresh motion or specific notice before modification | Court: claim unpreserved (not raised below) and, in any event, record shows defendant had notice of visitation disputes and participated; modification affirmed |
| Contempt finding for failure to pay $100/month | Plaintiff: defendant violated April 1, 2014 court order by not making scheduled payments | Defendant: failure to pay was not willful/was disputed; some related filing issues excused | Court: excused failure to file tax return when no fault shown, but found contempt for failure to make monthly $100 payments and ordered payment of unpaid balance |
Key Cases Cited
- Macricostas v. Kovacs, 67 Conn. App. 130 (discussion of appellant’s duty to provide an adequate appellate record)
- Gordon v. Gordon, 148 Conn. App. 59 (Practice Book § 64-1 requirements for trial court oral/written decisions and appellate record)
- Murcia v. Geyer, 151 Conn. App. 227 (limitations of appellate review when trial court’s factual/legal bases are not in the record)
- State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 (standard for appellate review of unpreserved constitutional claims)