R. H. v. M. H.

Citations

• 350 Conn. 432

Syllabus

The defendant mother appealed from the trial court's order modifying cus- tody of the parties' minor children. The defendant claimed, inter alia, that the trial court, in modifying custody, had improperly delegated its judicial authority to the plaintiff father when it gave him the power to unilaterally suspend the defendant's visitation with R, the parties' son, if the plaintiff ''reasonably determine[d],'' after consultation with R's therapist, that R's unsupervised visits with the defendant were causing R to endure negative behavioral or emotional consequences. Held: The trial court's order authorizing the plaintiff to exercise unilateral control over the defendant's visitation with R was an improper delegation of judicial authority, as a court may not delegate to a custodial parent the authority to suspend the visitation rights of a noncustodial parent. (Two justices concurring separately in one opinion) Argued December 18, 2023—officially released August 14, 2024