Birkhold v. Birkhold
Citations
- 343 Conn. 786
Syllabus
The plaintiff, whose marriage to the defendant had been dissolved, appealed from the trial court's postdissolution decision to grant the plaintiff's 343 Conn. 786 JUNE, 2022 787 Birkhold v. Birkhold motion for modification of alimony and the defendant's motion for contempt, and to award the defendant past due alimony and attorney's fees. When the parties' marriage was dissolved in 2009, the plaintiff was employed as the chief executive officer of a major corporation and was paid a base annual salary and bonuses. The parties' separation agreement, which had been incorporated into the judgment of dissolu- tion, required the plaintiff to pay the defendant alimony in the amount of 30 percent of his ''gross annual base income from employment'' and 25 percent of his gross cash bonus. The plaintiff subsequently left that corporation and, in 2015, began working as a commercial real estate broker for C Co. Under C Co.'s compensation plan, the plaintiff received annual draws on future commissions, initially in the amount of $35,000 a year, and, if he did not earn commissions sufficient to cover the draws, he was obligated to pay the difference back to C Co. The plaintiff elected to have the draws deposited into a bank account in the name of a limited liability company, S Co., that he had created in 2014. The plaintiff also deposited into that account money he earned in connection with certain consulting work he performed on the side. The plaintiff notified the defendant when his employment at C Co. began, and she initially agreed to accept monthly alimony in the amount of $875, or 30 percent of the $35,000 annual draw. The plaintiff, however, continued to pay her only $875 per month, even though his annual draw rate increased significantly between 2015 and 2019. In response, the defendant filed her motion for contempt and sought payment of accrued, unpaid alimony that purport- edly was owed under the separation agreement. The plaintiff, on the other hand, sought to modify his
Judges: Robinson; D’Auria; Mullins; Ecker; Keller
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
2 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
29 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Griffin Hospital v. Commission on Hospitals & Health CareSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1985-06-11· cited 202×
- Miller v. MillerSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1980-07-29· cited 132×
- Pasquariello v. PasquarielloSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1975-06-17· cited 127×
- Eldridge v. EldridgeSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1998-04-21· cited 114×
- Commissioner v. Indianapolis Power & Light Co.Supreme Court· 1990-01-09· cited 100×
- Unkelbach v. McNarySupreme Court of Connecticut· 1998-03-31· cited 94×
- Schmidt v. SchmidtSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1980-04-01· cited 71×
- Remillard v. RemillardSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2010-07-13· cited 67×
- In Re Leah S.Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2007-12-18· cited 66×
- Sablosky v. SabloskySupreme Court of Connecticut· 2001-12-11· cited 58×
- Marcus v. MarcusSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1978-05-16· cited 55×
- Mark D. Collins v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueSecond Circuit· 1993-08-30· cited 52×
- Jenkins v. JenkinsSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1998-01-27· cited 42×
- Isham v. IshamSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2009-06-23· cited 39×
- J.S. v. C.C.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2009-09-10· cited 39×
- Eckert v. EckertSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2008-03-04· cited 37×
- Morris v. MorrisSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2003-01-14· cited 32×
- Berkley v. GavinSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2000-07-25· cited 28×
- Gay v. GaySupreme Court of Connecticut· 2003-11-25· cited 24×
- Gabriel v. GabrielSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2016-12-28· cited 21×
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.