Lexis Nexis - Case Brief

Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Law School Case Brief

Aflalo v. Aflalo - No. FA000181650S, 2003 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1602 (Super. Ct. May 30, 2003)

Rule:

The Connecticut Child Support Guidelines provide that regularly recurring contributions or gifts of a spouse are specifically excluded from gross income in most cases, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-215a-1(11)(B)(iv), as is alimony that is current and paid currently, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-215a-1(1)(F).

Facts:

The parties' marriage was dissolved by judgment rendered on August 15, 2001 at which time the parties' separation agreement was incorporated in the decree. Financial orders were based on the plaintiff's occupation listed as "independent contractor-marketing" on her financial affidavit with a "presumed income of $ 2,000" monthly gross. The father's financial affidavit listed his occupation as consultant but currently unemployed.  When questioned by the court he testified that he listed $ 10,000 monthly gross and $ 6,634 monthly net based on his past earning capacity rather than on current earnings which were nil. He was ordered to pay $ 1,619 monthly child support for their two minor children who resided with their mother. Subsequently, despite the father's diligent efforts to find employment, he remained unemployed for a significant period. In July 2002, he married a woman who brought an annual income of $ 75,000 to this newly formed family unit.

The father filed an amended motion as to child support. The mother filed a financial affidavit listing employment as an account executive with a gross monthly income of $ 2,165, a part time item with $ 150 additional monthly income and after taxes a monthly net of $ 2,145.50. She incurs $ 330 monthly for her medical insurance. The father's financial affidavit filed January 15, 2003 listed his occupation as "investment counselor" with $ 2,500 monthly gross wage, other income monthly of $ 200 and a monthly net of $ 2,049.

Issue:

Was the father entitled to a modification of the child support order?

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The court found that based upon the information in the financial affidavits, the father was clearly and convincingly entitled to a modification of the child support order. Further, he was entitled to have the new order made retroactive under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-86(a). The court granted the motion. It also ordered the father to pay weekly child support of $ 76.16 effective as of November 15, 2002. The parties were ordered to divide equally the unreimbursed medical expenses incurred for the minor children. 

Access the full text case Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.
Be Sure You're Prepared for Class