Batista v. Cortes
Citations
- 203 Conn. App. 365
Syllabus
The defendant filed a motion to modify custody of the parties' minor child. After a hearing, the court denied the motion, determining that it was in the best interests of the child for her primary residence to remain with the plaintiff. On appeal, the defendant claimed that the trial court erred in denying his motion to modify custody and in failing to examine his alleged overpayment of child support. Held: 1. The trial court did not err in denying the motion to modify custody of the parties' minor child because it determined that it was in the child's best interests for her primary residence to remain with the plaintiff: the court properly responded to allegations of the plaintiff's use of corporal punishment against the child by referring the matter to the Department of Children and Families and appointing a guardian ad litem, who partici- pated in the hearing on the motion, and there was nothing in the record to support the defendant's allegation that the court failed to consider the plaintiff's admission to the use of physical discipline in making its best interests determination; moreover, the defendant's remaining arguments in support of his assertion were unreviewable, as he waived his claim of judicial bias, did not preserve for appeal his claim of failure to appoint proper representation for the child, and this court declined to disturb the trial court's determination of the credibility of one of the plaintiff's witnesses, as such a determination was for the trial court as trier of fact. 2. This court declined to review the defendant's challenge to the accuracy of the child support payment audits: the issue of past child support payments was not before the trial court, which analyzed his allegations of overpayment only in the context of its determination of the best interests of the child, did not issue any orders regarding the audits, and issued an order only concerning the defendant's future child support obligations; accordingly, there was no claim for t
Judges: Bright; Lavine; Alexander
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.