5069 | Conn. App. Ct. | Mar 10, 1987
The defendant appeals from the trial court’s judgment entering certain pendente lite orders in this dissolution case. The trial court issued a comprehensive and well reasoned memorandum of decision setting forth its factual findings in detail and applying the appropriate legal criteria. See Kaplan v. Kaplan, 8 Conn. App. 114" date_filed="1986-07-08" court="Conn. App. Ct." case_name="Kaplan v. Kaplan">8 Conn. App. 114, 116-18, 510 A.2d 1024" date_filed="1986-07-08" court="Conn. App. Ct." case_name="Kaplan v. Kaplan">510 A.2d 1024 (1986). There is no requirement in the applicable statutes which makes it mandatory that a trial court consider the federal tax implications of its financial orders. The court’s judgment was not an abuse of its necessarily broad discretion. McPhee v. McPhee 186 Conn. 167" date_filed="1982-02-02" court="Conn." case_name="McPhee v. McPhee">186 Conn. 167, 177, 440 A.2d 274 (1982); Niles v. Niles, 9 Conn. App. 240" date_filed="1986-12-09" court="Conn. App. Ct." case_name="Niles v. Niles">9 Conn. App. 240, 254, 518 A.2d 932 (1986); Jetmore v. Jetmore, 6 Conn. App. 632, 634, 507 A.2d 116 (1986).
There is no error.