Lenczewski v. Lenczewski

Citations

• 229 Conn. App. 752

Syllabus

The defendant appealed from the trial court's denial of his postdissolution motions for modification of alimony and for contempt and from its granting of the plaintiff's motion for contempt. He claimed, inter alia, that the court improperly denied his motion for a reduction of his alimony obligation. Held: The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for modification of alimony. This court declined to review the defendant's claims on appeal regarding the trial court's denial of his motion for modification that did not relate to the bases advanced in his motion to modify, that were not argued in his posttrial brief, and that the trial court appropriately did not address in adjudicating his motion, as those appellate claims were not properly before this court. This court declined to review the defendant's claim that the court improperly denied his motion for contempt seeking enforcement of a provision in an arbitration award ordering the plaintiff to contribute to the postsecondary education expenses of the parties' minor son, as the claimed error was induced by the defendant's contrary position, which the court adopted, that it lacked authority to enter remedial orders with respect to noncompliance with the arbitration award on the basis that the award was not an order of the court. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding the defendant in contempt, as the defendant's claim that a prior ruling precluded the court from finding him in contempt was conclusory and inadequately briefed, and his request for reconsideration of the judgment of contempt in light of his health and financial condition failed to challenge the basis for the finding of contempt. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding the plaintiff attorney's fees in connection with her motion for contempt, as the court was authorized to do so pursuant to statute (§ 46b-87), as well as in accordance with the parties' separation agreement. Argued Oct