Misiorski v. Misiorski
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the CourtHull, J.
The sole issue raised by the defendant in this case is whether the court erred in the amount of its award of permanent periodic alimony to the defendant wife in a dissolution case. We conclude that “this appeal presents one of the rare cases in which the trial court abused its broad discretion by misapplying the law and by making crucial findings which were not rea*464sonably supported by the facts.” McPhee v. McPhee, 186 Conn. 167, 177, 440 A.2d 274 (1982), quoted in Ehrenkranz v. Ehrenkranz, 2 Conn. App. 416, 420, 479 A.2d 826 (1984).
The facts found by the trial court, other than those…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Ehrenkranz v. EhrenkranzConnecticut Appellate Court · 1984
- McPhee v. McPheeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Schmidt v. SchmidtSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- Casanova v. CasanovaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1974
- England v. EnglandSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
3Cited by3 opinions
- Panganiban v. PanganibanConnecticut Appellate Court · 1999
- Broderick v. BroderickConnecticut Appellate Court · 1989
- Szegda v. SzegdaConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006