Bender v. Bender
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1DissentZarella, J.
The majority overrules a long line of prior decisions that defines the meaning of property for purposes of General Statutes § 46b-81. Because I believe that any redefinition is more appropriately the function of the legislature, I respectfully dissent.
The test for determining whether an interest, benefit or resource constitutes property for purposes of equitable distribution under § 46b-81 historically has been whether the party to the dissolution has an existing enforceable right to it. See, e.g., Lopiano v. Lopiano, 247 Conn. 356, 366-67, 752 A.2d 1000 (1998) (personal injury award);…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- O'Brien v. O'BrienNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
- Peck v. JacqueminSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
- Burns v. BurnsNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- Krafick v. KrafickSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Giaimo v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.