· 3/15/2022

Seder v. Errato

Citations

  • 211 Conn. App. 167

Syllabus

The defendant appealed from the judgment of the trial court dissolving his marriage to the plaintiff. During the dissolution proceedings, the defendant claimed that the parties had entered into a prenuptial agree- ment but that the agreement was missing. The court held an evidentiary hearing to permit the defendant to attempt to prove the existence and terms of that agreement by offering collateral evidence as to its contents. The defendant attempted to introduce as a proposed exhibit a boilerplate prenuptial agreement that had been downloaded from an online pub- lisher of legal documents in order to prove the content of the parties' alleged agreement. The document had several areas that were not popu- lated and there were no financial disclosures attached. The plaintiff testified that she had signed a prenuptial agreement but that the defen- dant had not signed it, and she had no clear recollection as to what the terms might have been or what the defendant's financial disclosures may have included. The court found that, although there was a premarital agreement that was signed prior to the date of the marriage, there was a lack of evidence as to the terms of the agreement, and concluded that the proposed exhibit would not be allowed into evidence. Following a trial, the court ordered the defendant to contribute to the plaintiff's legal fees and costs. On the defendant's appeal to this court, held: 1. The trial court did not err in failing to enforce the alleged prenuptial agreement, the evidence having amply supported the court's finding that the defendant did not sufficiently establish the contents of the agreement: although the defendant presented some evidence to prove the contents of the alleged missing agreement, including the proposed exhibit, the court found that no specific date of the agreement had been proven and there was a conflict with the nature and depth of the financial disclosures; moreover, contrary to the defendant's claim, the court did not impe

Judges: Cradle; Alexander; Eveleigh

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.