Copyright © 2007-2008, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. All rights reserved.
Connecticut Judicial Branch Law Libraries
Enforcement of Family,
Civil Unions and Foreign Matrimonial Judgments
in Connecticut
A Guide to Resources in the Law Library
· “Wherever in the general statutes the terms ‘spouse’, ‘family’, ‘immediate family’, ‘dependent’, ‘next of kin’ or any other term that denotes the spousal relationship are used or defined, a party to a civil union shall be included in such use or definition, and wherever in the general statutes, except sections 7-45 and 17b-137a, subdivision (4) of section 45a-727a, and sections 46b-20 to 46b-34, inclusive, 46b-38nn and 46b-150d, the term ‘marriage’ is used or defined, a civil union shall be included in such use or definition.” CONN. GEN. STATS. § 46b-38oo (2008).
· CONTEMPT: “is a disobedience to the rules and orders of a court which has power to punish for such an offense . . . . A civil contempt is one in which the conduct constituting the contempt is directed against some civil right of an opposing party and the proceeding is initiated by him.” (emphasis added) Stoner v. Stoner, 163 Conn. 345, 359, 307 A.2d 146 (1972).
· COURT ORDER MUST BE OBEYED: “. . . an order entered by a court with proper jurisdiction ‘must be obeyed by the parties until it is reversed by orderly and proper proceedings.’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) [Cologne v. Westfarms Associates, 197 Conn. 141, 145, 496 A.2d 476 (1985)] Id. We noted that a party has a duty to obey a court order ‘however erroneous the action of the court may be. . . .’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id. We registered our agreement with the ‘long-standing rule that a contempt proceeding does not open to reconsideration the legal or factual basis of the order alleged to have been disobeyed. . . .’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id., 148. Finally, we emphasized that ‘court orders must be obeyed; there is no privilege to disobey a court's order because the alleged contemnor believes that it is invalid.’” Mulholland v. Mulholland, 229 Conn. 643 (1994), 649, 643 A.2d 246
· MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION: “ . . . we conclude that where there is an ambiguous term in a judgment, a party must seek a clarification upon motion rather than resort to self-help.” Sablosky v. Sablosky, 258 Conn. 713, 720, 784 A.2d 890 (2001).
· STANDARD OF APPELLATE REVIEW: "A finding of contempt is a question of fact, and our standard of review is to determine whether the court abused its discretion in failing to find that the actions or inactions of the [party] were in contempt of a court order. . . . To constitute contempt, a party's conduct must be wilful. . . . Noncompliance alone will not support a judgment of contempt." (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Prial v. Prial, 67 Conn. App. 7, 14, 787 A.2d 50 (2001).
Sections in this chapter
§ 4. Enforcement of foreign matrimonial judgments under UIFSA
§ 4a. Enforcement of foreign matrimonial judgments under URESA
Tables in this chapter
Table 1 Requirements for Motion for Contempt
Table 2 ALR Annotations on Contempt
Table 3 Foreign Matrimonial Judgments under UIFSA
Table 4 Foreign matrimonial judgments in Connecticut (URESA)
|
SCOPE: |
Bibliographic resources relating to contempt and the enforcement of family judgments in Connecticut
|
|
TREATED ELSEWHERE |
· Enforcement of out-of-state alimony decrees in Connecticut · Enforcement of Child Support · Enforcement of out-of-state child support orders in Connecticut
|
|
DEFINITIONS: |
· Contempt: “Contempt is a disobedience to the rules and orders of a court which has power to punish for such an offense.” State v. Jackson, 147 Conn. 167, 168-169, 158 A.2d 166 (1960). · “Contempt may be civil or criminal in character.” Ibid. · “A civil contempt is one in which the conduct constituting the contempt is directed against some civil right of an opposing party and the proceeding is initiated by him.” Ibid. p. 169. [Emphasis added] · “Criminal contempt is conduct which is directed against the dignity and authority of the court. In such a case, the court may punish the offender on its own motion, without the presentation of any charge, formal or otherwise, and solely upon facts within its own knowledge. When the offense is committed in the presence of the court, punishment may be imposed at once. This power inheres in, and is essential to, any court, in order that it may be enabled to administer justice.” Ibid. p. 169. {Emphasis added] · “In civil contempt proceedings, ‘the punishment must be conditional and coercive’ and ‘the contemnor must be in a position to purge himself.’ (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Mays v. Mays, 193 Conn. 261, 266, 476 A.2d 562 (1984).” Wilson v. Cohen, 222 Conn. 591, 599, 610 A.2d 1177 (1992). · Not criminal prosecution: “This court has repeatedly stated that ‘[i]n this class of contempt, the proceedings are criminal in nature but do not constitute a criminal prosecution.’” Ibid., p. 600. · CHILD SUPPORT: “Contempt proceedings are a proper means of enforcing a court order of child support. A willful failure to pay court ordered child support as it becomes due constitutes indirect civil contempt. Duve v. Duve, 25 Conn. App. 262, 269, 594 A.2d 473, cert. denied, 220 Conn. 911, 597 A.2d 332 (1991); see General Statutes 46b-215. In the absence of a stay, the trial court continues to have jurisdiction to enforce its orders during an appeal from those orders. Hartford Federal Savings and Loan Assn. v. Tucker, 192 Conn. 1, 7, 469 A.2d 778 (1984).” Mulholland v. Mulholland, 31 Conn. App. 214, 220-221, 624 A.2d 379 (1993). · MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION: “ . . . we conclude that where there is an ambiguous term in a judgment, a party must seek a clarification upon motion rather than resort to self-help.” Sablosky v. Sablosky, 258 Conn. 713, 720, 784 A.2d 890 (2001). · STANDARD OF APPELLATE REVIEW: "A finding of contempt is a question of fact, and our standard of review is to determine whether the court abused its discretion in failing to find that the actions or inactions of the [party] were in contempt of a court order. . . . To constitute contempt, a party's conduct must be wilful. . . . Noncompliance alone will not support a judgment of contempt." (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Prial v. Prial, 67 Conn. App. 7, 14, 787 A.2d 50 (2001).
|
|
STATUTES: |
· Conn. Gen. Stat. (2008) Chapter 815a. Family matters § 46b‑8. Motion for modification combined with motion for contempt Chapter 871. Courts § 51-33. Punishment for contempt of court § 51-33a. Criminal contempt Chapter 901. Damages, costs and fees § 52-256b. Award of attorney’s and officer’s fees in contempt action
|
|
COURT RULES: |
· Connecticut Practice Book (2008 Edition) Chapter 1. Scope of the rules § 1-13A. Contempt § 1-14. —Criminal Contempt § 1-15. —Who may be Punished [Repealed] § 1-16. —Summary Criminal Contempt § 1-17. —Deferral of Proceedings § 1-18. —Nonsummary Contempt Proceedings § 1-19. —Judicial Authority Disqualification in Nonsummary Contempt Proceedings § 1-20. —Where No Right to Jury Trial in Nonsummary Proceeding § 1-21. —Nonsummary judgment § 1-21A. —Civil Contempt Chapter 25 Superior Court—Procedure in Family Matters § 25-27. Motion for Contempt § 25-63. Right to Counsel in Family Civil Contempt Proceedings § 25-64. —Waiver
|
|
FORMS: |
· JD-FM-173. Motion for contempt [Official form] · Motion for Contempt—Form, 8 Arnold H. Rutkin et al. Connecticut Practice Series. Family Law And Practice with Forms (2d ed. 2000). § 34.6 · Form for contempt and order to show cause, 2 Family Law Practice in Connecticut (1996). [14.13]
|
|
COURT CASES:
|
· Nunez v. Nunez, 85 Conn. App. 735, 739-740, 858 A.2d 873 (2004). “In Mallory v. Mallory, 207 Conn. 48, 57, 539 A.2d 995 (1988), the defendant father claimed that he was too poor to meet his court-ordered financial obligations. Our Supreme Court, after stating that inability to obey an order qualifies as a proper defense to contempt, stated: ‘The defendant in the case at bar, however, failed to seek a modification of his child support obligations until after the plaintiff had instituted contempt proceedings against him. In these circumstances, the trial court did not err in finding the defendant in contempt, at least in regard to the child support arrearage accumulated before he sought a modification of the child support orders.’ Id. It concluded that under those circumstances, a finding of contempt was proper. Subsequently, in Sablosky v. Sablosky, supra, 258 Conn. 713, our Supreme Court stated that ‘[a]lthough one party may believe that his or her situation satisfies this standard [of changed circumstance], until a motion is brought to and is granted by the court, that party may be held in contempt in the discretion of the trial court if, in the interim, the complaining party fails to abide by the support order.’ (Emphasis added.) Id., 722; see also Bunche v. Bunche, 36 Conn. App. 322, 325, 650 A.2d 917 (1994) (order of court must be obeyed until modified or successfully challenged).” · Issler v. Issler, 50 Conn. App. 58, 65, 716 A.2d 938 (1998). “While an equivocal court order will not support a finding of contempt, this is not the case here.” · Mulholland v. Mulholland, 31 Conn. App. 214, 215-216, 624 A.2d 379 (1993). “The sole question presented by this appeal is whether a trial court may render a judgment of contempt after an appellate court has reversed the underlying order where the acts constituting the contempt occurred prior to the reversal. We conclude that the sanction of contempt may be imposed on a party for the willful failure to pay any sums due under an order of child support that is on appeal at the time of the nonpayment, regardless of whether the sanction is imposed before or after the appellate reversal. This conclusion is dictated by our rules of practice, our case law and by sound considerations of public policy.”
|
|
WEST KEY NUMBERS:
|
· West Key Numbers Divorce # 269. Enforcement of order, judgment, or decree. Contempt proceedings (.5). In general (1). What constitutes contempt (2). Power land authority of court (3). Nature and form of remedy (4). Existence of other remedies (5) Statutory provisions as to imprisonment (6). Conditions precedent (7). Persons entitled to prosecute (8). Service of notice or order (9). Defenses and excuses for nonpayment or noncompliance with order (10). Pleading or affidavit (11). Evidence (12). Trial or hearing (13). Order, judgment, or decree (14). Purging contempt and discharge from imprisonment
|
|
DIGESTS: |
· Dowling’s Digest Dissolution of marriage § 18
|
|
SUBJECT HEADINGS: |
· Connecticut Family Law Citations Contempt
|
|
ENCYCLOPEDIAS: |
· 24 am. Jur. 2d. Divorce and Separation (1998). §§ 860-928. Enforcement of judgment, decree, or order; Provisional remedies §§ 908-928. Contempt proceedings · 27B C.J.S. Divorce (1986). §§ 445-480. Enforcement of order or decree § 451. Contempt proceedings
|
|
TEXTS & TREATISES: |
· 4 Arnold H. Rutkin, Gen. ed.Family Law and Practice (2007). Chapter 47. Enforcement of court orders § 47.06. Contempt, Relief to litigant and incarceration [1] Introduction [2] Necessity to show intentional default [a] Constitutional considerations; Notice and hearing requirements [3] Necessity to show lack of effectiveness of other remedies [4] Extent of arrears [5] Hearing considerations; Proof requirements [a] Use of disclosure devices [b] Selection and orientation of witnesses and client [6] Right to purge [7] Contempt defenses [8] Orders in aid of enforcement of litigant’s rights [9] Commitment [10] Summary proceedings in courts of limited jurisdiction · 2 Family Law Practice in Connecticut (1996). Chapter 14. Enforcement of judgment by John F. Morris III. Enforcement against the person: Contempt and other remedies A. Contempt 1. [14.7] In general a. [14.8] Definition of contempt b. [14.9] Civil contempt c. [14.10] Criminal contempt d. [14.11] Indirect contempt e. [14.12] Direct contempt 6. [14.20] Order and punishment |
|
COMPILERS: |
· Lawrence Cheeseman, Supervising Law Librarian, Connecticut Judicial Branch, Law Library at Middletown, One Court Street, Middletown, CT 06457. (860) 343-6561. EMAIL
|
A Guide to Resources in the Law Library
|
SCOPE: |
Bibliographic resources relating to defenses of contempt in Connectciut
|
|
SEE ALSO: |
· See also: § 3 Laches and Estoppel · |
|
DEFINITION: |
· INABILITY: “The inability of the defendant to obey an order of the court, without fault on his part, is a good defense to a charge of contempt.” Tobey v. Tobey, 165 Conn. 742, 746, 345 A.2d 21 (1974). · WILFULLNESS: “To constitute contempt, a party's conduct must be wilful. . . . Noncompliance alone will not support a judgment of contempt.” Prial v. Prial, 67 Conn. App. 7, 14, 787 A.2d 50 (2001). · ACTUAL NOTICE: “In holding that 46b-46 (b) permits the court to modify a dissolution judgment to require a nonresident defendant to pay child support if the nonresident had actual notice of the modification proceedings, we reach a result that is consistent with that reached by courts that have faced similar questions in other jurisdictions.” Jones v. Jones, 199 Conn. 287, 294, 507 A.2d 88 (1986). · |
|
STATUTES:
|
· Conn. Gen. Stat. (2008) § 46b‑8. Motion for modification combined with motion for contempt
|
|
COURT RULES:
|
· Connecticut Practice Book (2008 Edition) Chapter 25 Superior Court—Procedure in family matters
|
|
FORMS:
|
· JD-FM-173. Motion for contempt · Motion for contempt Pendente Lite [Post Judgment], 3 Joel M. Kaye and Wayne D. Effron, Connecticut Practice Series, Civil Practice Forms (4th ed. 2004). Form 506
|
|
COURT CASES
|
· Nunez v. Nunez, 85 Conn. App. 735, 739-740, 858 A.2d 873 (2004). “In Mallory v. Mallory, 207 Conn. 48, 57, 539 A.2d 995 (1988), the defendant father claimed that he was too poor to meet his court-ordered financial obligations. Our Supreme Court, after stating that inability to obey an order qualifies as a proper defense to contempt, stated: ‘The defendant in the case at bar, however, failed to seek a modification of his child support obligations until after the plaintiff had instituted contempt proceedings against him. In these circumstances, the trial court did not err in finding the defendant in contempt, at least in regard to the child support arrearage accumulated before he sought a modification of the child support orders.’ Id. It concluded that under those circumstances, a finding of contempt was proper. Subsequently, in Sablosky v. Sablosky, supra, 258 Conn. 713, our Supreme Court stated that ‘[a]lthough one party may believe that his or her situation satisfies this standard [of changed circumstance], until a motion is brought to and is granted by the court, that party may be held in contempt in the discretion of the trial court if, in the interim, the complaining party fails to abide by the support order.’ (Emphasis added.) Id., 722; see also Bunche v. Bunche, 36 Conn. App. 322, 325, 650 A.2d 917 (1994) (order of court must be obeyed until modified or successfully challenged).” · Issler v. Issler, 50 Conn. App. 58, 65, 716 A.2d 938 (1998). “While an equivocal court order will not support a finding of contempt, this is not the case here.” · Eldridge v. Eldridge, 244 Conn. 523, 529, 710 A.2d 757 (1998). “In order to constitute contempt, a party’s conduct must be wilful . . . . A good faith dispute on legitimate misunderstanding of the terms of an alimony or support obligation may prevent a finding that the payor’s nonpayment was wilful.” · Castro v. Castro, 31 Conn. App. 761, 627 A.2d 452 (1993). · Perry v. Perry, 222 Conn. 799, 805, 611 A.2d 400 (1992). “inability to pay an order is a defense to a charge of contempt . . . . however, . . . the defendant has the burden of proof on this issue . . . .” · Papcun v. Papcun, 181 Conn. 618, 620, 436 A.2d 608 (1980). “contention that the plaintiff is barred by laches from collecting the arrearage.” · Farrell v. Farrell, 36 Conn. App. 305, 650 A.2d 608 (1994). Equitable decree voiding certain fraudulent conveyances of property. · Sturtevant v. Sturtevant, 146 Conn. 644, 153 A.2d 828 (1959). Out of state decree in Connecticut court.
|
|
DIGESTS:
|
· West Key Numbers Divorce §§ 260-277 § 269(9). Contempt proceeding. Defenses and excuse for nonpayment or non compliance with order · Dowling’s Digest Dissolution of marriage § 18
|
|
SUBJECT HEADINGS: |
· Connecticut Family Law Citations Contempt
|
|
ENCYCLOPEDIAS:
|
· 24 am. Jur. 2d. Divorce and Separation (1998). § 1075. Generally § 1076. Inability of obligor to pay amount owing · 27B C.J.S. Divorce (1986). § 452. Contempt proceedings. Prerequisites a. In general b. Existence of other remedies or pending proceedings c. Demand for payment and refusal d. Needs and abilities of spouses · John C. Williams, Annotation, Laches Or Acquiescence As Defense, So As To Bar Recovery Of Arrearages Of Permanent Alimony Or Child Support, 5 ALR4th 1015 (1981).
|
|
TEXTS & TREATISES:
|
· 4 Arnold H. Rutkin, Gen. ed.Family Law and Practice (2007). Chapter 47. Enforcement of court orders § 47.06. Contempt, Relief to litigant and incarceration [7] Contempt defenses [a] Generally [b] Inability to comply [c] Substantial compliance [d] Waiver and agreement [e] Reconciliation [f] Other defenses · 8 Arnold H. Rutkin et al. Connecticut Practice Series. Family Law And Practice with Forms (2d ed. 2000) Chapter 34. Enforcement of alimony and child support provisions of judgment § 34.11. Excuse or defense to contempt claim § 34.12. Inability to comply § 34.14. Laches and/or estoppel as a defense to contempt § 34.15. Estoppel—in kind payments or other modifications § 34.16. Misconduct by the complaining party · 2 Family Law Practice in Connecticut (1996). Chapter 14. Enforcement of judgment III. Enforcement against the person: Contempt and other remedies A. Contempt 5. [14.16] Defenses to contempt a. [14.17] Validity of the order b. [14.18]. Failure to comply with c. [14.10]. Criminal contempt d. [14.19] Lack of willfulness · Joel M. Kaye et al. 3 Connecticut Practice Book, Authors’ Comments following Form 506.2, pp. 154-159 (1996).
|
|
COMPILER: |
Lawrence Cheeseman, Supervising Law Librarian, Connecticut Judicial Department, Law Library at Middletown, One Court Street, Middletown, CT 06457. (860) 343‑6560. EMAIL
|
Table 1 Requirements for Motion for Contempt
|
Requirements for Motion for Contempt Conn. Practice Book § 25-27 (2008)
|
|
|
(a) |
Each motion for contempt must state (1) the date and specific language of the order of the judicial authority on which the motion is based; (2) the specific acts alleged to constitute the contempt of that order, including the amount of any arrears claimed due as of the date of the motion or a date specifically identified in the motion; (3) the movant's claims for relief for the contempt.
|
|
(b) |
Each motion for contempt must state clearly in the caption of the motion whether it is a pendente lite or a postjudgment motion, and the subject matter and the type of order alleged to have been violated.
|
Table 2 ALR Annotations on Contempt
|
ALR Annotations on Contempt
|
|
|
ADR |
· Richard D. English, Annotation, Alternative Dispute Resolution: Sanctions For Failure To Participate In Good Faith In, Or Comply With Agreement Made In, Mediation, 43 ALR5th 545 (1996). |
|
Alimony |
· Annotation, Pleading And Burden Of Proof, In Contempt Proceedings, As To Ability To Comply With Order For Payment Of Alimony Or Child Support, 53 ALR2d 591 (1957). · Annotation, Decree For Alimony Rendered In Another State Or Country (Or Domestic Decree Based Theron) As Subject To Enforcement By Equitable Remedies Or By Contempt Proceedings, 18 ALR2d 862 (1951). |
|
Another court |
· Alois Valerian Gross, Annotation, Contempt Based On Violation Of Court Order Where Another Court Has Issued Contrary Order, 36 ALR4th 978 (1985). |
|
Anticipatory contempt |
· Michael J. Yaworsky, Annotation, Contempt: State Court’s Power To Order Indefinite Coercive Fine Or Imprisonment To Exact Promise Of Future Compliance With Court’s Order—Anticipatory Contempt, 81 ALR4th 1008 (1990). |
|
Appeal |
· Roland F. Chase, Annotation, Appealability Of Contempt Adjudication Or Conviction, 33 ALR3d 589 (1970). · Annotation, Appealability Of Acquittal From Or Dismissal Of Charge Of Contempt Court, 24 ALR3d 650 (1969). |
|
Attire |
· Thomas R. Trenkner, Annotation, Power Of Court To Impose Standard Of Personal Appearance Or Attire, 73 ALR3d 353 (1976). |
|
Attorney |
· Annotation, Assault On Attorney As Contempt, 61 ALR3d 500 (1975). |
|
Attorney Fees |
· A.S. Klein, Annotation, Allowance Of Attorneys’ Fees In Civil Contempt Proceedings, 43 ALR3d 793 (1972).
|
|
Child support |
· Annotation, Power Of Divorce Court, After Child Attained Majority, To Enforce By Contempt Proceedings Payment Of Arrears Of Child Support, 32 ALR3d 888 (1970). |
|
Discovery |
· Michael G. Dupee, Annotation, Right of defendant in criminal contempt proceeding to obtain information by deposition, 33 ALR5th 761 (1995). |
|
Instituting |
· Annotation, Who May Institute Civil Contempt Proceedings, 61 ALR2d 1083 (1958). |
|
Judge |
· Russell G. Donaldson, Annotation, Disqualification Of Judge In State Proceedings To Push Contempt Against Or Involving Himself In Open Court And In His Actual Presence, 37 ALR4th 1004 (1985). · Annotation, Affidavit For Disqualification Of Judge As Contempt, 70 ALR3d 797 (1976). |
|
Obscene language |
· Marjorie A. Caner, Annotation, Profane Or Obscene Language By Party, Witness, Or Observer During Trial Proceedings As Basis For Contempt Citation, 29 ALR5th 702 (1995). |
|
Oral communication |
· Michael A. DiSabatino, Annotation, Oral Communication Insulting To Particular State Judge, Made To Third Party Out Of Judge’s Physical Presence, As Criminal Contempt, 30 ALR4th 155 (1984). |
|
Property settlement |
· Christopher H. Hall, Divorce: Propriety Of Using Contempt Proceeding To Enforce Property Settlement Award Or Order, 72 ALR4th 298 (1989).
|
|
SCOPE: |
· Bibliographic resources relating Laches and/or Estoppel as a defense to contempt in alimony or child support
|
|
CURRENCY: |
· 2008 Edition
|
|
DEFINITIONS: |
· LACHES: “Laches consists of two elements. ‘First, there must have been a delay that was inexcusable, and, second, that delay must have prejudiced the defendant.’ . . . . The mere lapse of time does not constitute laches; . . unless it results in prejudice to the defendant. . . . nor does the mere lapse of time (twenty-three years) relieve the defendant of his responsibility.” Bozzi v. Bozzi, 177 Conn. 232, 239, 413 A.2d 834 (1979) . · CONTEMPT: “while a wife's long delay in attempting to enforce alimony payments does not destroy or affect the obligation of the husband to obey the order of the court, such delay is properly to be considered in determining whether a husband should be held in contempt for failure to pay. Not only may a wife's right to alimony be abandoned . . . but by her laches a divorced wife may be barred from the equitable aid of the court to secure payment of alimony arrears through use of the power of the court to punish for contempt.” Piacquadio v. Piacquadio, 22 Conn. Sup. 47, 50,159 A.2d 628 (1960). · ARREARAGES: “The issue to be decided by the court is whether contempt proceedings are available as a remedy to collect support arrearages after the child has reached the age of majority . . . . This court will hold that it has jurisdiction in a contempt proceeding to enter an order to pay child support on unpaid installments which accrued before the child reached majority, where the proceedings were commenced after the child reached majority.” Arnold v. Arnold, 35 Conn. Sup. 244, 245-246, 407 A.2d 190 (1979). · ESTOPPEL: There are two essential elements to an estoppel — the party must do or say something that is intended or calculated to induce another to believe in the existence of certain facts and to act upon that belief; and the other party, influenced thereby, must actually change his position or do some act to his injury which he otherwise would not have done.” Tradesmens National Bank of New Haven v. Minor, 122 Conn. 419, 190 A. 270 (1937). · DUE DILIGENCE: “A person who claims estoppel must show that he exercised due diligence to know the truth.” Spear-Newman, inc. v. Modern Floors Corporation, 149 Conn. 88,175 A.2d 565 (1961). · SPECIAL DEFENSE: “ . . . special defense of equitable estoppel. ‘In its traditional form the doctrine of equitable estoppel states that a party (1) who is guilty of a misrepresentation of existing fact including concealment, (2) upon which the other party justifiably relies, (3) to his injury, is estopped from denying his utterances or acts to the detriment of the other party.’. . . ‘In considering the law of estoppel in Connecticut, we have stated: ‘Under our well-established law, any claim of estoppel is predicated on proof of two essential elements: the party against whom estoppel is claimed must do or say something calculated or intended to induce another party to believe that certain facts exist and to act on that belief; and the other party must change its position in reliance on those facts, thereby incurring some injury. Bozzi v. Bozzi, 177 Conn. 232, 242, 413 A.2d 834 (1979); Dupuis v. Submarine Base Credit Union, Inc., [170 Conn. 344, 353, 365 A.2d 1093 (1976)]; Pet Car Products, Inc. v. Barnett, 150 Conn. 42, 53-54, 184 A.2d 797 (1962)"; Zoning Commission v. Lescynski, [188 Conn. 724, 731, 453 A.2d 1144 (1982)].' Kimberly-Clark Corporation v. Dubno, 204 Conn. 137, 148, 527 A.2d 679 (1987).’ O'Sullivan v. Bergenty, 214 Conn. 641, 648, 573 A.2d 729 (1990). "It is fundamental that a person who claims an estoppel must show that he has exercised due diligence to know the truth, and that he not only did not know the true state of things but also lacked any reasonably available means of acquiring knowledge.’”). Connecticut National Bank v. Voog, 233 Conn. 352, 366-367, 659 A.2d 172 (1995).
|
|
STATUTES: |
· CONN. GEN. STATS. (2008) § 46b-87. Contempt of orders. When any person is found in contempt of an order of the Superior Court entered under section 46b-60 to 46b-62, inclusive, 46b-81 to 46b-83, inclusive, or 46b-86, the court may award to the petitioner a reasonable attorney's fee and the fees of the officer serving the contempt citation, such sums to be paid by the person found in contempt, provided if any such person is found not to be in contempt of such order, the court may award a reasonable attorney's fee to such person. The costs of commitment of any person imprisoned for contempt of court by reason of failure to comply with such an order shall be paid by the state as in criminal cases.
|
|
WEST’S KEY NUMBERS:
|
Pleading # 76-100 |
|
SUBJECT HEADINGS: |
· American Law Reports: Laches and Delay · CONN. FAMILY LAW CITATIONS Laches; Estoppel
|
|
FORMS:
|
· 19B. AM JUR PLEADING AND PRACTICE FORMS (2007). Pleadings § 95 Answer—Defense—Laches
|
|
CASES: |
· Riscica v. Riscica, 101 Conn. App. 199, 208, 921 A.2d 633 (2007). “We next turn to the defendant's defense of laches. ‘Laches consists of an inexcusable delay which prejudices the defendant. . . . First, there must have been a delay that was inexcusable, and, second, that delay must have prejudiced the defendant.’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Sablosky v. Sablosky, [408] Conn. App. 413. ‘A determination that a plaintiff has been guilty of laches is one of fact for the trier and not one that can be made by this court, unless the subordinate facts found make such a determination inevitable as a matter of law.’ Kalinowski v. Kalinowski, 92 Conn. App. 344, 352, 885 A.2d 194 (2005). The mere lapse of time does not constitute laches . . . unless it results in prejudice to the defendant . . . as where, for example, the defendant is led to change his position with respect to the matter in question." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Emerick v. Emerick, supra, 28 Conn. App. 804. · Sablosky v. Sablosky, 72 Conn. App. 408, 414-15, 805 A.2d 745 (2002). “We now address the defense of equitable estoppel. ‘[A] claim of estoppel is predicated on proof of two essential elements: the party against whom estoppel is claimed must do or say something calculated or intended to induce another party to believe that certain facts exist and to act on that belief; and the other party must change its position in reliance on those facts, thereby incurring some injury. . . . It is fundamental that a person who claims an estoppel must show that he has exercised due diligence to know the truth, and that he not only did not know the true state of things but also lacked any reasonably available means of acquiring knowledge.’” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) · “To find the plaintiff in contempt, the court must first find that there is in fact an arrearage due to the defendant, and if so, the court must find that the plaintiff's failure to pay the amounts ordered was a wilful violation of the court's order. Before a modification can be ordered, it must be determined whether there has been a substantial change of circumstances in the financial status of either party.” Lownds v. Lownds, 41 Conn. Sup. 100, 103-104, 551 A.2d 775 (1988). · Burrier v. Burrier, 59 Conn. App. 593758 A.2d 373 (2000). “The burden is on the party alleging laches to establish that defense.” · “A conclusion that a plaintiff has been guilty of laches is one of fact for the trier and not one that can be made by this court, unless the subordinate facts found make such a conclusion inevitable as a matter of law.” Papcun v. Papcun, 181 Conn. 618, 621, 436 A.2d 282 (1980).
|
|
ENCYCLOPEDIAS: |
· John C. Williams, Annotation, Laches Or Acquiescence As Defense, So As To Bar Recovery Of Arrearages Or Permanent Alimony Or Child Support, 5 Alr4th 1015 (1981). · Annotation, Spouse’s Acceptance Under Alimony Or Property Settlement Or Child Support As Precluding Appeal Therefrom, 29 ALR3rd 1184 (1970).
|
|
TEXTS & TREATISES:
|
· 8 ARNOLD H. RUTKIN ET AL. CONNECTICUT PRACTICE SERIES. FAMILY LAW AND PRACTICE WITH FORMS (2d ed. 2000). Chapter 34. Enforcement of alimony and child support provisions of judgment § 34.14. Laches and/or Estoppel as a defense to contempt § 34.15. Estoppel—In kind payments or other modifications § 34.16. Misconduct by the complaining party § 34.17. Contempt penalties and terms for payment § 34.18. Contempt penalties—Incarceration § 34.19. Criminal action based on non-payment of alimony or support obligations § 34.20. Enforcement of alimony or support obligation against property § 34.21. Receivership § 34.22. Garnishment or income withholding, Generally § 34.23. Voluntary ordered income withholding § 34. 24. Court ordered income withholding § 34.25. Income withholding based on delinquency § 34.26. Priorities and exemptions associated with income withholding § 34.27. Employer obligations associated with income withholding § 34.28. Limitations of income withholding § 34.29. Payment through support enforcement office § 34.30. Withholding tax refunds § 34.31. Other federal remedies § 34.32. Writ of ne exeat § 34.33. Security for performance § 34.34. Claims for interest and/or damages § 34.35. Effect of pending claim for modification § 34.36. Effect of pending appeal
|
|
ENCYCLOPEDIAS: |
· 61A AM JUR 2d Pleadings § 349. Affirmative Defenses
|
|
COMPILER: |
Lawrence Cheeseman, Supervising Law Librarian, Connecticut Judicial Department Law Library at Middletown, One Court Street, Middletown, CT 06457. (860) 343-6560. Email
|
A Guide to Resources in the Law Library
|
SCOPE: |
Bibliographic resources relating to the filing and enforcement in Connecticut of matrimonial judgments from other jurisdictions under Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA), effective Jan. 1, 1998.
|
|
SEE ALSO: |
· Section 17-3a. Foreign Matrimonial Judgments in Connecticut under RURESA
|
|
STATUTES:
|
· Conn. Gen. Stat. (2008) Chapter 816. Support Part Ia. Uniform Interstate Family Support Act § 46b-212. Short title: Uniform Interstate Family Support Act § 46b-212a. Definitions § 46b-212b. Tribunals of state § 46b-212c. Remedies cumulative § 46b-212d. Jurisdiction over nonresident § 46b-212e. Procedure when exercising jurisdiction over non resident § 46b-212f. Family Support Magistrate Division as initiating and responding tribunal § 46b-212g. Simultaneous proceedings in another state § 46b-212h. Continuing, exclusive jurisdiction of Family Support Magistrate Division or Superior Court, when § 46b-212i. Enforcement and modification of support orders by Family Support Magistrate Division § 46b-212j. Recognition of controlling child support orders § 46b-212k. Multiple child support orders for two or more obliges § 46b-212l. Credit for support payments § 46b-212m. Proceedings. Procedure § 46b-212n. Action by minor parent § 46b-212o. Applicability of state law § 46b-212p. Duties of initiating tribunal § 46b-212q. Duties and powers of responding tribunal § 46b-212r. Inappropriate tribunal § 46b-212s. Duties of support enforcement agency § 46b-212t. Legal Services by Attorney General. Private counsel § 46b-212u. Duty of Commissioner of Social Services § 46b-212v. Duties of state information agency
|
|
|