O'Halpin v. O'Halpin, 144 Conn. App. 671

Valerie O’Halpin filed for dissolution of a 22-year marriage in July 2009; most marital assets were spent by trial in October 2011, the primary remaining asset being the Stamford marital residence.
A discovery master (Judge Malone) held multi-day hearings on discovery and related pretrial motions; the trial on financial issues then proceeded before Judge Emons and concluded October 18, 2011.
The trial court (Feb. 28, 2012) found the marriage irretrievably broken, attributed fault to both parties, awarded no alimony, allocated attorney fees to each party, and ordered the marital residence listed and sold, with a schedule for periodic price reductions; the court retained jurisdiction over the sale.
Plaintiff appealed, claiming (1) failure to sanction defendant for discovery misconduct and fee-shifting, (2) exclusion of evidence of pre-separation dissipation of assets, and (3) improper postjudgment modification when the court later reduced the listing price.
The trial court later (July 23, 2012) granted the defendant’s postjudgment motion to reduce the listing price pursuant to the earlier order’s retained-jurisdiction provisions; plaintiff amended her appeal to challenge that ruling.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether court abused discretion by not sanctioning defendant or awarding attorney fees for discovery misconduct	O’Halpin: defendant’s discovery noncompliance caused extraordinary legal expenses and warranted fee award	O’Halpin’s motions were addressed by Judge Malone; no court order supports fee award	Affirmed: record inadequate (transcripts lacking) to review; appellant bears burden to provide record, so claim not reviewable
Whether trial court improperly excluded evidence of dissipation of marital assets pre-separation	O’Halpin: evidence (closed accounts, cashed policies, stock sales) showed dissipation and should have been admitted	Defendant/Judge Malone addressed dissipation claims; Judge Emons properly relied on Malone’s rulings	Affirmed: review precluded for lack of complete transcript of Judge Malone proceedings
Whether postjudgment reduction of listing price modified property award	O’Halpin: reducing listing price postjudgment impermissibly modified property distribution	Court retained jurisdiction and acted to effectuate original sale order; reduction consistent with prior directive to lower price periodically	Affirmed: July 23, 2012 order effectuated, not modified, the original judgment

Berzins v. Berzins, 306 Conn. 651 (court may sanction discovery misconduct; standards for fee-shifting)
Ramin v. Ramin, 281 Conn. 324 (discusses discovery misconduct and fee awards in family matters)
Perez v. D & L Tractor Trailer School, 117 Conn. App. 680 (appellant’s duty to provide adequate record, including transcripts)
State v. Germain, 142 Conn. App. 805 (appellate review impossible without full transcript)
Fewtrell v. Fewtrell, 87 Conn. App. 526 (distinguishing modification from orders effectuating an existing judgment)
Buehler v. Buehler, 138 Conn. App. 63 (equitable powers to protect integrity of original judgment)
Stechel v. Foster, 125 Conn. App. 441 (comparison of original judgment and postjudgment orders to determine modification vs effectuating order)