Legal Opinion

Zirinsky v. Zirinsky

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided February 8, 2005No. AC 23558; AC 24289PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SCHALLER, J.

These two appeals arise from post-judgment orders by the trial court. The defendant, Bruce Zirinsky, appeals from certain postdissolution orders of the court, all of which essentially denied his request *260for modification of an agreement between the parties with respect to the payment of child support. In both appeals, the defendant claims that the court improperly (1) permitted the plaintiff, Sarah Zirinsky,1 to use a motion to strike to attack the legal sufficiency of post-judgment motions, (2) considered facts outside the pleadings when ruling on the plaintiffs motions to…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. State v. CurcioSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
  2. Parsons v. United Technologies Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
  3. Breen v. PhelpsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
  4. Craig v. DriscollSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
  5. Hatt v. Burlington Coat FactorySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Ocwen Federal Bank, FSB v. CharlesConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
  2. Tracy v. New Milford Public SchoolsConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007
  3. State v. TaylorConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
  4. Mercer v. CosleyConnecticut Appellate Court · 2008
  5. Wells Fargo Bank of Minnesota, N.A. v. MorganConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006

11 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