Legal Opinion

Stern v. Stern

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided June 29, 1973PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLoiselle, J.

This appeal challenges the court’s award in a divorce action of temporary alimony to the plaintiff, Caryl S. Stern. Harold Stern, hereinafter referred to as the defendant, claims that alimony pendente lite awards may not be made constitutionally under § 46-21 of the General Statutes and therefore the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to award temporary alimony in the present case. The basic thrust of the defendant’s argument is that § 46-21 is constitutionally deficient and invalid because it provides alimony pendente lite for wives in such a manner as to violate the equal protection…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Baker v. CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Linda R. S. v. Richard D.Supreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. Reed v. ReedSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. Frontiero v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  5. F. S. Royster Guano Co. v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1920

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Orr v. OrrSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Maloney v. PacSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
  3. Koizim v. KoizimSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
  4. Rose v. Freedom of Information CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
  5. Light Rigging Co. v. Department of Public Utility ControlSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991

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

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

Powered by the Exa API