2010 Ct. Sup. 817
No. FA06-4103491Connecticut Superior Court Judicial District of New London at Norwich
December 8, 2009
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION REGARDING MOTION TO CLARIFY AND/OR REARGUE (224)
SHLUGER, J.
The record reflects that the parties were divorced on May 9, 2007. The plaintiff filed a motion for contempt (199) dated April 27, 2009 regarding access to the minor children. The defendant filed a lengthy objection to said motion for contempt (210) dated September 29, 2009. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed a motion for contempt (202) dated July 31, 2009 regarding the defendant’s nonpayment of certain credit card bills. Said motion was continued at the defendant’s request until October 19, 2009 to allow the defendant to engage counsel. On October 29, 2009, the court (Vasington, J.) entered orders regarding custody and deferred making any orders regarding an access schedule. Thereafter, the parties appeared before the undersigned on November 9, 2009. The undersigned issued a memorandum of decision regarding the access schedule dated November 10, 2009 but neglected to address the financial issues raised in the contempt dated July 31, 2009.
The plaintiff filed a motion to clarify and/or reargue dated November 19, 2009 (224) regarding the financial issues raised in the contempt motion dated July 31, 2009. The parties appeared before the undersigned on December 7, 2009 to argue their respective positions.
The defendant acknowledged that she owed the plaintiff $2,500 as a result of her failure to pay her share of the Chase credit card bill as ordered in the judgment. She acknowledged that the plaintiff paid that bill on her behalf to clear up his credit so that he could close on his new home. She denied that she was in contempt and denied that he was required to pay additional attorneys fees of $2,403.75 so that his attorney could effectuate a compromise with that credit card company.
The court finds that the defendant is in contempt for her failure to pay the Chase credit card bill as ordered by the judgment. The court finds that the plaintiff incurred reasonable attorneys fees to his divorce lawyer in the amount of $500 to prosecute this contempt. The court finds CT Page 818 that 50% of the attorneys fees incurred to reach a compromise with the credit card company, or $1,201.87, were reasonably incurred. The court finds that the defendant has paid $250 toward the amount owed to the plaintiff.
Wherefore, the court finds that the defendant owes to the plaintiff $4,201.87 less the $250, which he has already paid, for a balance due to him in the amount of $3,951.87 to be paid to him at the rate of $100 per month commencing February 1, 2010.
CT Page 819