Legal Opinion

Champagne v. Champagne

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided November 9, 2004No. 22910, 24001PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

DRANGINIS, J.

These two appeals arise from a dissolution of marriage action. In appeal AC 22910, the defen dant, John F. Champagne, claims that the trial court improperly (1) modified orders pertaining to the method of sale of the parties’ marital home by giving to the plaintiff, Elaine S. Champagne, the sole authority to set the listing price pf the property and to accept an offer for sale, (2) required real estate taxes in arrears to be paid from the gross proceeds of the sale of the marital home even though such taxes were to be paid by the plaintiff while she was receiving pendente…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Giulietti v. GiuliettiConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
  2. Bornemann v. BornemannSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
  3. Jewett v. JewettSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
  4. Wallenta v. MoscowitzConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
  5. Zadravecz v. ZadraveczConnecticut Appellate Court · 1995

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Duplissie v. DevinoConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
  2. State v. HendersonConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
  3. Farren v. FarrenConnecticut Appellate Court · 2013
  4. Mason v. FordConnecticut Appellate Court · 2017
  5. Pryor v. PryorConnecticut Appellate Court · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API