Kosar v. Giangrande
Citations
- 228 Conn. App. 749
Syllabus
The defendant appealed from, inter alia, the judgment of the trial court dissolving her marriage to the plaintiff and its grant of the plaintiff's amended motion for contempt. She claimed, inter alia, that the court abused its discretion when it limited her presentation of her case-in-chief to only fifteen minutes during the hearing on the contempt motion. Held: The trial court abused its discretion and violated the defendant's right to due process by affording her only fifteen minutes to present her case-in- chief at the hearing on the plaintiff's amended motion for contempt and motion for an injunction, the court having made no effort to divide the time equitably between the parties or to otherwise ensure that the defendant had sufficient time to put on her case; accordingly, this court reversed the judgment of the trial court with respect to the award of attorney's fees and ordered a new hearing for the limited purpose of determining whether the plaintiff was entitled to an award of attorney's fees. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in declining to hear the defendant's motion to open the parties' pendente lite agreement regarding the marital home during the hearing on the plaintiff's amended motion for contempt and motion for an injunction. The defendant could not prevail on her claim that the trial judge committed plain error by failing to recuse himself sua sponte from presiding over the parties' dissolution trial after previously holding a hearing pursuant to Matza v. Matza (226 Conn. 166) regarding her then counsel's motion to withdraw, as the defendant failed to demonstrate that the claimed impropriety was so clear, obvious and indisputable as to warrant the extraordinary remedy of reversal, and, even if this court assumed that it was error for the trial judge not to recuse himself, this court would be unable to conclude that the error was so obvious as to be not debatable. The defendant's claim that the trial court improperly applied the missing
Judges: Cradle; Clark; Seeley
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.