Connecticut Judicial Branch Law Libraries
Copyright © 2000-2009, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. All rights reserved.
in Family Matters
A Guide to Resources in the Law Library – 2009 Edition
· Discovery in Family Matters: “The provisions of Sections 13-1 through 13-11 inclusive, 13-13 through 13-16 inclusive, and 13-17 through 13-32 of the rules of practice inclusive, shall apply to family matters as defined in Section 25-1.” Conn. Practice Book § 25-31 (2009).
· Scope of Discovery: “In any civil action, in any probate appeal, or in any administrative appeal where the judicial authority finds it reasonably probable that evidence outside the record will be required, a party may obtain in accordance with the provisions of this chapter discovery of information or disclosure, production and inspection of papers, books or documents material to the subject matter involved in the pending action, which are not privileged, whether the discovery or disclosure relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of any other party, and which are within the knowledge, possession or power of the party or person to whom the discovery is addressed.” Conn. Practice Book § 13-2 (2009)
· When Permitted: “Discovery shall be permitted if the disclosure sought would be of assistance in the prosecution or defense of the action and if it can be provided by the disclosing party or person with substantially greater facility than it could otherwise be obtained by the party seeking disclosure. It shall not be ground for objection that the information sought will be inadmissible at trial if the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Written opinions of health care providers concerning evidence of medical negligence, as provided by General Statutes § 52-190a, shall not be subject to discovery except as provided in that section.” Conn. Practice Book § 13-2 (2009).
|
|
SCOPE: |
Bibliographic resources relating to the purpose and scope of discovery in general.
|
|
DEFINITIONS: |
· Discovery:
A formal request by one party in a lawsuit to disclose information or facts
known by other parties or witnesses. · Purpose of discovery in general: “The new rules . . . invest the deposition-discovery process with a vital role in the preparation for trial. The various instruments of discovery now serve (1) as a device . . . to narrow and clarify the basic issues between the parties, and (2) as a device for ascertaining the facts, or information as to the existence or whereabouts of facts, relative to those issues. Thus civil trials . . . no longer need be carried on in the dark. the way is now clear, consistent with recognized privileges, for the parties to obtain the fullest possible knowledge of the issues and facts before trial.” Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 501 (1947). · Mandatory disclosure and production: “Unless otherwise ordered by the judicial authority for good cause shown, upon request by a party involved in an action for dissolution of marriage or civil union, legal separation, annulment or support, or a postjudgment motion for modification of alimony or support, opposing parties shall exchange the following documents within thirty days of such request . . . .” Practice Book § 25-32(a) (2009). · Request: “means any application to the court which shall be granted by the clerk by operation of these rules unless timely objection is filed.” Practice Book § 11-2 (2009). · Interrogatories: “are written questions propounded by one party and served on adversary, who must serve written answers thereto under oath.” Neske v. Burns, 149 A. 761 (1930). · Deposition: “is the written testimony of a witness given in the course of a judicial proceeding and may be used at trial to test the credibility of the deponent as he testifies…It may also be used in order to refresh the recollection of a witness…A deposition is testimony which remains in the custody of the clerk of the court and is not an exhibit unless offered into evidence.” Rybinski v. Supermarkets General Corp, 2 Conn.App. 494, 495-496, 479 A.2d 1242, 1243 (1984). (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) |
|
COURT RULES: |
· Conn. Practice Book. (2009). Chapter 13. Discovery and Depositions § 13-1. Definitions § 13-2. Scope of discovery; In general Chapter 25. Superior Court —Procedure in Family Matters § 25-31. Discovery and Depositions § 25-32. Mandatory disclosure and production § 25-56. Production of Documents at Hearing or Trial
|
|
COURT CASES: |
· Weinstein v. Weinstein, 275 Conn 671, 882 A.2d 53 (2005). “‘Finally, the principle of full and frank disclosure . . . is essential to our strong policy that the private settlement of the financial affairs of estranged marital partners is a goal that courts should support rather than undermine. . . . That goal requires, in turn, that reasonable settlements have been knowingly agreed upon…. Our support of that goal will be effective only if we instill confidence in marital litigants that we require, as a concomitant of the settlement process, such full and frank disclosure from both sides, for then they will be more willing to [forgo] their combat and to settle their dispute privately, secure in the knowledge that they have all the essential information. . . . This principle will, in turn, decrease the need for extensive discovery, and will thereby help to preserve a greater measure of the often sorely tried marital assets for the support of all of the family members.’ (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Billington v. Billington, 220 Conn. 212, 219-22, 595 A.2d 1377 (1991).” · Ramin v. Ramin, 281 Conn. 324, 915 A.2d. 790 (2007). “First, it would be grossly unfair to the plaintiff to require her to establish precisely how she was harmed in proving her case by not having access to the extensive list of already ordered discovery materials to which she never gained access solely as a result of the court's refusal to consider her motion… Second, placing the burden in this respect on the defendant who failed to comply fully with the court's orders is consistent with our decision in Billington v. Billington, supra, 220 Conn. 221, in which we articulated the requirement of full and frank mutual disclosure in marital cases.” |
|
FORMS: |
· Library of Connecticut Family Law Forms, Thomas D. Colin, Editor. (2008). Form # 003-001 Notice of Deposition 003-002 Subpoena Duces Tecum for a Deposition 003-003 Subpoena Duces Tecum for a Hearing/Trial 003-004 Subpoena Ad Testificandum 003-005 Request for Interrogatories 003-006 Request for the Production and Inspection of Records 003-007 Request for Mandatory Disclosure and Production 003-008 Response to Request for Production of Documents 003-009 Coversheet Re: Response to Request for Production of Documents 003-010 Supplemental Response to Request for Production of Documents 003-011 Request to Produce at Hearing 003-012 Motion to Compel Response to Interrogatories and Requests for the Production of Documents 003-013 Motion for Appointment of Commission to Take the Deposition of a Nonresident 003-014 Motion for Issuance of a Capias 003-015 Motion to Quash Subpoena and for Protective Order 003-016 Motion for Protective Order Re: Deposition 003-017 Motion to Preclude Expert Witness 003-018 Request to Admit 003-01 Coversheet Re: Request to Admit 003-020 Request for Extension of Time 003-021 Confidentiality Agreement 003-022 Letter to Client Re: Returning Client’s Documents 003-023 Letter to Client Re: Deposition Transcript and Errata Sheet 003-024 Letter to Witness Re: Postponed Deposition 003-025 Motion to Appoint Discovery Special Master 003-026 Motion for Order of Compliance
· 7 Arnold H. Rutkin and Kathleen A. Hogan, Connecticut Practice Series, Family Law and Practice with Forms (1999). Chapter 21. Disclosures and discovery § 21.3. Interrogatories § 21.4 —Form § 21.5 Requests for Production, Inspection and Examination § 21.6. Request for Production—Form § 21.11. Notice of Deposition—Form § 21.12. Client notification letter and instruction sheet regarding deposition—Form § 21.13. Request for Production at Deposition § 21.14. Motion to Quash Request for Production at Deposition—Form § 21.15. Motion for Videotape Deposition—Form § 21.16. Motion to Take Out of State Deposition—Form § 21.21. Motion for Protective Order—Form § 21-23. Notice of Supplemental Compliance—Form · 2 Arnold H. Rutkin, Gen. Editor, Family Law and Practice (2007). Chapter 13. Financial discovery § 13.10. Sample discovery forms [1] FORM: Sample Discovery Letter [2] FORM: Sample Notice to Produce [3] FORM: Sample Motion for Discovery · 1 FAMILY LAW PRACTICE IN CONNECTICUT (1996) Chapter 4. Motion Practice in Matrimonial Action § 4.30. Interrogatories and Requests for Production § 4.31. Motion for Compliance § 4.32. Sanctions § 4.33. Protective Orders § 4.34. Notice of Deposition § 4.35. Motion to Quash § 4.36. Deposition by Videotape § 4.37. Commission to Take Out-of-State Deposition
|
|
CHECKLISTS: |
· 2 Arnold H. Rutkin, Gen. Editor, Family Law and Practice (2007). Chapter 13. Financial discovery § 13.02[2]. Requests for Production Checklist
|
|
TEXTS & TREATISES: |
· 7 Arnold H. Rutkin and Kathleen A. Hogan, Connecticut Practice Series, Family Law and Practice with Forms (1999). Chapter 21. Disclosures and discovery § 21.1 In general § 21.2 Mandatory Disclosure and Production · Civil Discovery Practice in Connecticut (1995) Chapter 1. The Practical Applications of Connecticut Discovery Rules Chapter 2. Limitations on Discovery · 1 Family Law Practice In Connecticut (1996) Chapter 4. Motion Practice in Matrimonial Action § 4.29. Discovery Techniques § 4.30. Interrogatories and Requests for Production § 4.31. Motion for Compliance § 4.32. Sanctions § 4.33. Protective Orders § 4.34. Notice of Deposition § 4.35. Motion to Quash § 4.36. Deposition by Videotape § 4.37. Commission to Take Out-of-State Deposition · 2 Arnold H. Rutkin, Gen. Editor, Family Law and Practice (2007). Chapter 13. Financial Discovery § 13.01. Introduction to financial discovery § 13.02. Obtaining basic information § 13.03. Barriers to obtaining information § 13.04. Analysis of data § 13.05. Discovery of business interests § 13.06. Financial statements § 13.07. Federal tax returns § 13.08. Stockbroker statements § 13.09. Bank records § 13.10. Sample discovery forms
|
|
CURRENT COMPILER: |
Christopher Roy, Connecticut Judicial Branch Law Library at
New Britain,
|
|
* Originally compiled by Lawrence Cheeseman, retired Connecticut Judicial Branch Supervising Law Librarian. |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
Unless otherwise ordered by the judicial authority for good cause shown, upon request by a party involved in an action for dissolution of marriage or civil union, legal separation, annulment or support, or a postjudgment motion for modification of alimony or support, opposing parties shall exchange the following documents within thirty days of such request:
|
|
(1) |
all federal and state income tax returns filed within the last three years, including personal returns and returns filed on behalf of any partnership or closely-held corporation of which a party is a partner or shareholder;
|
|
(2) |
IRS forms W-2, 1099 and K-1 within the last three years including those for the past year if the income tax returns for that year have not been prepared;
|
|
(3) |
copies of all pay stubs or other evidence of income for the current year and the last pay stub from the past year;
|
|
(4) |
statements for all accounts maintained with any financial institution, including banks, brokers and financial managers, for the past 24 months;
|
|
(5) |
the most recent statement showing any interest in any Keogh, IRA, profit sharing plan, deferred compensation plan, pension plan, or retirement account;
|
|
(6) |
the most recent statement regarding any insurance on the life of any party;
|
|
(7) |
a summary furnished by the employer of the party's medical insurance policy, coverage, cost of coverage, spousal benefits, and COBRA costs following dissolution;
|
|
(8) |
any written appraisal concerning any asset owned by either party
|
|
(b) |
Such duty to disclose shall continue during the pendency of the action should a party appear. This section shall not preclude discovery under any other provisions of these rules.
|
|
“Connecticut's rules of practice provide that depositions,
after transcription, are to be sealed and not to be delivered to court until the
time of trial. Practice Book § 13-30(e). A deposition is not an ‘open’
proceeding. Lupone v. Lupone, Superior Court, judicial district of New
Haven, Docket No. 446200 (July 3, 2001) (Pittman, J.) citing Seattle Times
Co. v. Rhinehart, supra, 467 U.S. 20. Similarly, neither interrogatories
and answers to interrogatories; Practice Book §§ 13-6 and 13-7; nor requests
for or notices of requests for production and responses are filed with the
court. Practice Book §§ 13-9 and 13-10.”
|
|
|
Conn. Practice Book § 13-5. Protective Order |
|
|
Conn. Practice Book § 25-59A(c) Sealing Files or Limiting Disclosure of Documents in Family Matters |
|
|
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-11 Closed Hearings and Records. |
|
|
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-49 Private Hearing. |
|
|
SCOPE: |
Bibliographic resources relating to postjudgment discovery in family matters.
|
|
DEFINITIONS: |
· Scope of Discovery: “In any civil action, in any probate appeal, or in any administrative appeal where the judicial authority finds it reasonably probable that evidence outside the record will be required, a party may obtain in accordance with the provisions of this chapter discovery of information or disclosure, production and inspection of papers, books or documents material to the subject matter involved in the pending action, which are not privileged, whether the discovery or disclosure relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or to the claim or defense of any other party, and which are within the knowledge, possession or power of the party or person to whom the discovery is addressed.” Conn. Practice Book § 13-2 (2009) (Emphasis added.) · Discovery in Family Matters: “The provisions of Sections 13-1 through 13-11 inclusive, 13-13 through 13-16 inclusive, and 13-17 through 13-32 of the rules of practice inclusive, shall apply to family matters as defined in Section 25-1.” Conn. Practice Book § 25-31 (2009). |
|
SEE ALSO:
|
· Post-Judgment Proceedings in Connecticut Family Matters (Research Guide)
|
|
COURT RULES: |
· Conn. Practice Book. (2009). Chapter 13. Discovery and Depositions § 13-1. Definitions § 13-2. Scope of discovery; In general § 13-15. Continuing Duty to Disclose Chapter 25. Superior Court —Procedure in Family Matters § 25-31. Discovery and Depositions |
|
COURT CASES: |
· Oneglia v. Oneglia, 14 Conn.App. 267, 540 A.2d 713 (1988). “In family matters, the court exercises its equitable powers. The balancing of equities is a matter which falls within the discretion of the trial court. . . .For that reason, equitable remedies are not bound by formula but are molded to the needs of justice.” (Citations omitted.) · Mattson v. Mattson, 74 Conn. App. 242, 811 A.2d 256 (2002). “We note, however, that we previously have rejected a claim identical to the defendant's, i.e., that a party seeking to open a judgment of dissolution on the basis of allegations of fraud has a right to conduct discovery based onlyon its filing of a motion to open. Oneglia v. Oneglia, 14 Conn. App. 267, 269,540 A.2d 713 (1988). As we explained, ‘[t]his is clearly an incorrect premise; until the court acts on a motion to open, the earlier judgment is still intact andneither our rules of practice nor our statutes provide for such a thing aspostjudgment discovery.’ Id. ‘If the [defendant] was able to substantiate [his]allegations of fraud beyond mere suspicion, then the court would open the judgment for the limited purpose of discovery, and would later issue an ultimate decision on the motion to open after discovery had been completed and another hearing held.’ Id., 270. Because the defendant in this case was unable to meet that minimal evidentiary threshold, the court's ruling was proper.” · Nolan v. Nolan, 76 Conn. App. 583, 821 A.2d 772 (2003). “The court conducted a postjudgment probable cause hearing to determine whether any discovery, beyond the testimony of the parties, should be allowed in the future to substantiate the plaintiff's allegations of fraud. As a matter preliminary to such discovery, a plaintiff has the burden to substantiate allegations of fraud that are sufficient to open the judgment. Oneglia v. Oneglia, 14 Conn. App. 267, 269, 540 A.2d 713 (1988).” · Weinstein v. Weinstein, 275 Conn 671, 882 A.2d 53 (2005). “Thus, as our case law for the last fifteen years makes clear, the duty to disclosecontinued until the judgment of dissolution was final. In the present case, however, because the defendant filed a motion forreconsideration, the judgment ultimately did not become final until thedissolution court acted on his motion.” · Port v. Port, FA04-4002839-S, Conn. Super. Ct., J.D. of Fairfield at Bridgeport (Jun. 2, 2006). “To prevail in an Oneglia hearing, the movant must substantiate his claim of fraud on the part of the defendant, beyond a mere suspicion. Oneglia v. Oneglia, 14 Conn.App. 26, 540 A.2d 713 (1988). If the moving party prevails the judgment is opened for the limited purpose of discovery. A second hearing is then conducted to determine whether there was fraud, based on the clear and convincing evidence standard.”
|
|
TEXTS & TREATISES: |
· 7 Arnold H. Rutkin and Kathleen A. Hogan, Connecticut Practice Series, Family Law and Practice with Forms (1999). Chapter 52. § 52.7 Motion to Reopen or Set Aside Judgment on the Basis of Fraud § 52.9. Request for New Trial |
|
COMPILER: |
Christopher Roy, Connecticut Judicial Branch Law Library
at New Britain,
|
Connecticut Judicial Branch Law Libraries