Legal Opinion

Seaver v. Seaver

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided March 10, 1987No. 5069PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

The defendant appeals from the trial court’s judgment entering certain pendente lite orders in this dissolution case. The trial court issued a comprehensive and well reasoned memorandum of decision setting forth its factual findings in detail and applying the appropriate legal criteria. See Kaplan v. Kaplan, 8 Conn. App. 114, 116-18, 510 A.2d 1024 (1986). There is no requirement in the applicable statutes which makes it mandatory that a trial court consider the federal tax implications of its financial orders. The court’s judgment was not an abuse of its necessarily broad discretion. McPhee…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. McPhee v. McPheeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
  2. Niles v. NilesConnecticut Appellate Court · 1986
  3. Jetmore v. JetmoreConnecticut Appellate Court · 1986
  4. Kaplan v. KaplanConnecticut Appellate Court · 1986

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Maturo v. MaturoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
  2. Rolla v. RollaConnecticut Appellate Court · 1998
  3. Hawkins v. HawkinsConnecticut Appellate Court · 1987
  4. Clement v. ClementConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
  5. Maturo v. MaturoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API