Skip to main content

Berman v. Berman

Citations

  • 203 Conn. App. 300

Syllabus

The plaintiff, whose marriage to the defendant had previously been dis- solved, appealed from the decision of the trial court denying in part his postjudgment motion for modification of alimony. The plaintiff sought a modification of his obligation to pay alimony, to provide for the defen- dant's health insurance and to maintain life insurance, alleging that his income had decreased substantially since the date of dissolution. At the hearing on the motion, the self-represented defendant made statements regarding certain equity that she had not taken in the plaintiff's business during her cross-examination of the plaintiff and during her closing argument, but did not question the plaintiff regarding the equity that she allegedly gave up or any claims to real estate or business assets that she may have abandoned in exchange for alimony. Held: 1. The trial court improperly found that the defendant had relinquished claims she might have had to certain marital assets in exchange for lifetime alimony, as that finding was not supported by the record: there was no testimony or evidence proffered at the hearing on the motion for modification to demonstrate that the parties had made such an exchange, nor was there any language in the parties' agreement that supported the court's finding, and, although the defendant made state- ments at the hearing while questioning the plaintiff and during her closing argument that she gave up equity for alimony, her statements did not constitute evidence, and the court appropriately cautioned her to that effect, and the defendant did not offer testimony from any other witness, including herself, in support of her claim that she exchanged equity for lifetime alimony. 2. The trial court abused its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion for modification of alimony on the basis of its erroneous finding that the defendant had given up claims during the dissolution proceedings; although the trial court implicitly found a substantial change i

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that trial court erred in considering as evidence statements made by self-represented defendant when she was acting as counsel during hearing
  • fair reading of court’s memorandum of decision revealed that court implicitly found substantial change in circumstances

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Elgo; Alexander; DiPentima

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced 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.