· 2/4/2025

Cardona v. Padilla

Citations

  • 230 Conn. App. 534

Syllabus

The plaintiff mother appealed from the trial court's judgment granting the defendant father primary physical custody of the parties' minor child and ordering certain visitation for the plaintiff with the child. On appeal, the plaintiff claimed, inter alia, that the court abused its discretion in making its custody and visitation orders. Held: This court rejected the plaintiff's claim that the trial court's shared physical custody order constituted an abuse of its discretion because the trial court failed to credit evidence demonstrating that the defendant was unwilling to facilitate the child's relationship with the plaintiff, as it was not the province of this court to reweigh the evidence or to substitute its judgment for that of the trial court. The trial court abused its discretion by issuing an unbalanced visitation order that significantly limited the plaintiff's in-person visitation with the child because the record did not contain any findings of the court demonstra- ting why such a limited visitation schedule was warranted, such as a finding of complete unfitness, and the order was inconsistent with the clear intent of the statute (§ 46b-56 (b)), which requires that custody and visitation orders should provide the child with the active and consistent involvement of both parents, commensurate with their abilities and interests, and, accord- ingly, this court remanded the case for a new hearing on visitation. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by issuing an order pursuant to the rule of practice (§ 25-26 (g)) requiring the parties to request leave of the court before filing a motion for modification of custody or visitation orders, the court having indicated that it did so in light of the various cases and filings between the parties, its concerns about the best interest of the child, and its observations regarding the divisive and acrimonious nature of the parties' behaviors. Argued October 21, 2024—officially released February 4, 2025

Judges: Bright; Cradle; Seeley

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.