1 Conn. App. 604 | Conn. App. Ct. | 1984
On appeal,1 the defendant claims, in this action for dissolution of marriage, that the state referee erred (1) in finding facts unsupported by or contrary to the evidence; (2) in failing to consider the criteria of the statutes in awarding alimony and/or assigning property; and (3) in requiring the defendant to pay obligations in violation of
The findings of the trial court have a reasonable basis in the evidence, are not clearly erroneous and should not be disturbed. Pandolphe's Auto Parts, Inc. v. Manchester,
The trial court in its memorandum ordered, as "lump sum alimony," the assignment to the plaintiff wife of the defendant's right, title and interest to the family home, "pursuant to General Statutes
It is clear that the court was proceeding under General Statutes
The trial court's memorandum, contrary to the defendant's assertions, reviews almost all of the criteria of General Statutes
In making an assignment of property, the trial court need not recite all of the criteria of the statute. Garrison v. Garrison, supra, 177-78; Lane v. Lane,
The assignment of the marital home to the plaintiff was not error on the facts of this case.
The last issue to be resolved is whether the court erred in its judgment that the defendant must pay all of the liabilities listed on his financial affidavit and save the plaintiff harmless from any claims thereon. Such an award is permitted pursuant to General Statutes
The payment by the defendant of his own liabilities out of his own funds, whether those funds consist of social security benefits or other types of income is not prohibited by federal law. See French v. Department of Social Services,
There is no error.