Skip to main content
· 9/6/2022

Rek v. Pettit

Citations

  • 214 Conn. App. 854

Syllabus

The plaintiffs, legal guardians of the minor child C, appealed from the orders of the trial court requiring C to suspend contact with his long-term personal counselor, L, and engage with a new therapist with the goal of working toward the resumption of visitation with the defendants, C's maternal grandparents. Thereafter, the defendants filed a motion with the trial court, seeking an order that, notwithstanding the plaintiffs' appeal, there was no automatic appellate stay in effect. Subsequently, the trial court issued an order that there was no automatic stay of the custody and visitation orders and that the plaintiffs were to comply with the trial court's orders. Thereafter, the trial court denied the plain- tiffs' motion for a discretionary stay. Subsequently, the plaintiffs filed motions for review of the trial court's orders determining that there was no automatic appellate stay and denying their motion for a discre- tionary stay. Held: 1. This court granted the plaintiffs' motion for review of the trial court's order determining that there was no automatic appellate stay in effect but concluded that the plaintiffs could not prevail on their claim that the trial court incorrectly determined that there was no automatic appel- late stay; the trial court's orders pertained to the manner and extent of visitation, as well as contact with the defendants, and visitation orders expressly were exempt from the automatic appellate stay under the relevant rule of practice (§ 61-11 (c)). 2. This court granted the plaintiffs' motion for review of the trial court's order denying their motion for a discretionary stay and concluded that the trial court did not abuse its broad discretion only insofar as the court ordered the parties to engage with a new therapist for the purpose of facilitating visitation, but it concluded that the trial court did abuse its discretion in suspending contact between C and L, as that court did not have before it any evidence regarding the impact of

Judges: Bright; Suarez; 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.