· 8/26/2025

L. F. v. S. F.

Citations

  • 234 Conn. App. 602

Syllabus

The plaintiff mother appealed from the trial court's judgment denying her request for leave pursuant to the rule of practice (§ 25-26 (g)) to file a motion to modify custody of the parties' minor child. The plaintiff claimed that the court, without holding a hearing, improperly denied her request for leave, which alleged that the custody and visitation order in place contained an impermissible delegation of judicial authority. Held: The trial court improperly denied the plaintiff's request for leave to file a motion for modification and, on the basis of R. H. v. M. H. (350 Conn. 432), the plaintiff was entitled to a hearing on her motion for modification, as she properly raised the claim of impermissible delegation of judicial authority in her motion for modification appended to her request for leave, consistent with the requirements of Practice Book § 25-26 (g). Argued May 20—officially released August 26, 2025

Judges: Alvord; Suarez; Palmer

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.