Legal Opinion
Rau v. Rau
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided March 14, 1995No. 13006PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLavery, J.
The plaintiff appeals from the trial court’s denial of her motion for modification of alimony. The controlling issue is whether an alimony award that stated that “said order of alimony is to terminate after the ninety-six (96) payments are made” is nonmodifiable during the ninety-six week period when the word nonmodifiable is not used in the original award. The trial court found the award to be nonmodifiable, we disagree and reverse the trial court’s judgment.
The marriage of the plaintiff and the defendant was dissolved on October 30, 1991. The award of alimony to the plaintiff was set forth…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Barnard v. BarnardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- McGuinness v. McGuinnessSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- Scoville v. ScovilleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
- Cummock v. CummockSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- Bronson v. BronsonConnecticut Appellate Court · 1983
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Sheehan v. BalasicConnecticut Appellate Court · 1997
- Amodio v. AmodioConnecticut Appellate Court · 1997
- Valvo v. Freedom of Information CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- Burke v. BurkeConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
- Wichman v. WichmanConnecticut Appellate Court · 1998
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.