Thompson v. Rhodes
10 A.3d 537
| Conn. App. Ct. | 2010Background
- Plaintiff Nicole Thompson appeals a custody order granting defendant Kevin Rhodes primary physical custody.
- Mother and father, never married, share minor child; guardian ad litem appointed for the child.
- Family relations evaluation recommended sole legal and residential custody to Rhodes with a visitation schedule.
- Trial occurred in 2008 and 2009; memorandum of decision on July 8, 2009 awarded joint legal custody and primary residence to Rhodes.
- Thompson's appellate claims challenge due process, hearsay-based petitions, guardian ad litem testimony, and subpoena-related sanctions; the court found briefing inadequate and affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Due process claim on order without abuse evidence | Thompson argues court abused discretion lacking abuse evidence. | Rhodes contends order supported by record. | Issues inadequately briefed; not reviewed. |
| Hearsay-based petition by AG and DCF | Thompson contends petition relied on hearsay and violated due process. | Rhodes defends petition as proper in context. | Issues inadequately briefed; not reviewed. |
| Admission of guardian ad litem testimony and custody study | Thompson seeks dismissal of GAL and evaluator evidence. | Rhodes defends GAL and study as appropriate | Issues inadequately briefed; not reviewed. |
| Sanctions against entity for nonappearance/subpoena issues | Thompson requests sanctions for noncompliance with subpoena. | Rhodes opposing or reframing sanctions as appropriate. | Issues inadequately briefed; not reviewed. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Klinger, 103 Conn.App. 163 (2007) (pro se litigants bound by same rules; inadequately briefed claims not reviewed)
- Watkins v. Thomas, 118 Conn.App. 452 (2009) (analysis, not mere abstract assertion, required)
- Russell v. Russell, 91 Conn.App. 619 (2005) (must tie legal principles to the facts)