2004 Ct. Sup. 11023
No. FA03-0566044SConnecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of New London at New London
July 21, 2004
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
DOMNARSKI, JUDGE.
The complaint for this limited contested dissolution of marriage action is dated May 20, 2003. The plaintiff and the defendant were married on December 14, 1991 in New London, Connecticut. One party has resided in this state for a period of at least one year preceding the date of the filing of the action. There is one minor child issue of the marriage, Samantha Ryan Miceli, born March 1, 1992. No other minor children have been born to the plaintiff since the date of the marriage and neither party has been the recipient of State assistance. The marriage has broken down irretrievably without prospect of reconciliation.
The plaintiff wife is 44 years old and in good health. She is a high school graduate and is employed as the kitchen manager at a local community meal center where she works between thirty-five and forty hours per week. From this employment, she has gross wages of $455 per week and net wages of $336.20 per week. She has worked a second job as a waitress and bartender for many years, at which she has the ability to earn $125 per week. She also earns $30 per week for “side jobs.”
Her financial affidavit indicates that she has expenses of $728 per week and liabilities of $4,099, which include $3,000 in unpaid attorneys fees.
In September 2003, the defendant quit claimed his interest in the marital home located at 122 Plant Street, New London, to the plaintiff. Subsequently, the plaintiff refinanced the mortgage on the property in order to remove the defendant from liability therefrom, and to cash out $16,000 in equity. The $16,000 is presently being held in escrow and both parties claim it. The property at 122 Plant Street has a value of $158,000 and the current mortgage has a balance of $111,174, resulting in equity of approximately $46,800.
The plaintiff owns a 1997 Mazda valued at $4,000 and she has bank accounts that contain a total of $2,116. CT Page 11024
The defendant husband is 40 years old and in good health. He is a trade school graduate and he is employed as a plumber at Lawrence and Memorial Hospital. His gross wages are $975 per week and his net wages are approximately $700 per week. His financial affidavit indicates his expenses are $806 per week and his liabilities are $5,850, which include $3,000 in unpaid attorneys fees.
The defendant owns a 1986 Mazda valued at $300 and a 1994 Honda motorcycle valued at $1,500. He has bank accounts that have a total value of $2,850. The defendant also has a 401(k) retirement account that has a balance of $26,000 and a 403(b) retirement account that has a balance of $625. Almost all of the money in these retirement accounts was accumulated during the marriage. After the parties separated, the defendant unilaterally cashed in savings bonds accumulated during the marriage for which he received approximately $2,000.
To their credit, the parties reached an agreement, dated July 1, 2004, regarding custody issues pertaining to their daughter Samantha. Essentially, the parties will share joint legal custody and physical custody. The child will be with her father three nights a week and with her mother four nights a week. The child support guideline worksheet submitted by the defendant accurately reflects the income of the parties. It indicates a presumptive current support amount for the father of $125 per week. The defendant requests a downward deviation based upon shared custody. The plaintiff testified that she has enrolled Samantha in a private school and she seeks a deviation upward to reflect the tuition expense she will be paying. The court has considered these deviation requests and concludes that the presumptive current support amount is not inequitable or inappropriate. The defendant is to pay child support in the amount of $125 per week.
The parties separated in May 2001 after an incident involving the defendant and another woman. The defendant testified he made “mistakes” during the marriage. The court concludes he bears the larger share of responsibility for the breakdown of this marriage.
The court has considered the provisions of General Statutes § 46b-81 in formulating property assignment orders. Considering the value of the motor vehicles and bank accounts that each party has, as well as the defendant’s utilization of the savings bonds, it is fair and equitable that each party retain the bank accounts and motor vehicles in their possession.
The following assets remain to be assigned: the equity in the former CT Page 11025 marital home of $46,800, the $16,000 escrow from the refinance, and the $26,625 in the defendant’s retirement accounts. Considering the statutory factors, and giving weight to the defendant’s larger income and his resulting greater opportunity to acquire capital assets, and also considering the breakdown of the marriage, the court concludes that the plaintiff should receive 60% of the value of these assets and the defendant, 40%. These assets total $89,425 so the plaintiff should receive $53,655 and the defendant, $35,770. The plaintiff is to retain the equity in the home, which is now in her name, and the defendant is to retain his retirement accounts. To effectuate the property assignment, the defendant is to receive $9,145 from the escrow and the plaintiff is to retain the balance.
The court has considered the provisions of § 46b-82 regarding alimony and concludes the plaintiff is in need of continued support from the defendant. The plaintiff does not have health insurance benefits at her employment and she is covered under the insurance provided by the defendant’s employer. The cost of COBRA coverage is $358 per month for the medical plan and $35.70 per month for the dental plan. By way of spousal support, the defendant is to pay one half of the COBRA premium for the plaintiff’s health and dental coverage, should she request it, for the maximum period allowed by law. The plaintiff is to pay the remaining balance of said premiums.
Additionally, the defendant is to pay alimony to the plaintiff in the amount of $75 per week for a period of five years from the date of judgment. This period of time will allow the plaintiff an opportunity to maximize her earning capacity and will also bring about a diminution of her child care responsibilities.
ORDERS
1. The marriage is dissolved on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown.
2. The following stipulations of the parties regarding custody, dated July 1, 2004, are ordered:
A. The parties shall share joint legal custody of the minor child.
B. The parties shall share physical custody of the minor child in accordance with the following schedule: CT Page 11026
(1) Father shall have the minor child Monday 3:15 p.m. through Tuesday 3:00 p.m.; Wednesday 3:15 p.m. through Thursday 3:00 p.m. and Friday 3:15 p.m. through Saturday 4:00 p.m.
2) Mother shall have the child from Tuesday 3:00 p.m. to Wednesday 3:15 p.m.; Thursday 3:00 p.m. to Friday 3:15 p.m. and Saturday 4:00 p.m. to Monday 3:15 p.m.
(3) Each party shall be responsible for any daycare costs for the child during their access and any costs incurred by the other for daycare as a result of their failure to exercise their access with the child.
C. The parties shall have holiday and vacation access with the minor child on a schedule mutually determined. Mother shall have the minor child Christmas Eve and father Christmas Day. Father shall have Easter and the parties shall alternate Thanksgiving.
3. The defendant is to pay child support in the amount of $125 per week by wage garnishment. The parties shall share any unreimbursed medical expenses and any qualifying child care costs for the minor child in accordance with the child support guidelines as follows: plaintiff; 53%; defendant, 47%. The defendant shall maintain health and dental insurance for the minor child as available through his employment. In the event such insurance is not available through the defendant’s employment, the plaintiff shall maintain health insurance for the benefit of the minor child as available through her employment. If neither party has health insurance for the minor child available to them, they shall cooperate in obtaining Husky insurance for the minor child.
4. The parties shall exchange tax returns no later than May 1st for each year that the defendant has a child support obligation.
5. The parties shall alternate years in which to claim the minor child as a dependent for State and federal income tax filing purposes. The defendant shall be entitled to claim the exemption for the even-numbered years.
6. The court reserves jurisdiction to enter an order for educational support pursuant to General Statutes § 46b-56c. CT Page 11027
7. The defendant is to maintain life insurance for the benefit of the minor child in the amount of $100,000 until the minor child attains majority or until any educational support order terminates, whichever is later. He is to provide proof of this insurance to the plaintiff on July 16 of each year this order is in effect.
8. The defendant shall pay alimony to the plaintiff in the amount of $75 per week for a period of five years from the date of judgment. The alimony shall terminate upon the plaintiff’s remarriage or upon the death of either party. The duration of the alimony is non-modifiable. Alimony is to be paid by wage garnishment.
9. As spousal support, the defendant is to pay one half of the COBRA premiums for health and dental insurance for the plaintiff, should she request it. The plaintiff is to pay the balance of said premiums. The amount paid by the defendant for said premiums is deductible by the defendant and includable by the plaintiff for income tax purposes.
10. The defendant is to maintain life insurance in the amount of $25,000 for the benefit of the plaintiff for so long as he has an alimony obligation. He is to provide proof of this insurance to the plaintiff on July 16 of each year this order is in effect.
11. The plaintiff is to retain the real estate located at 122 Plant Street, New London, Connecticut, her 1997 Mazda, and the Lawrence and Memorial Hospital Credit Union accounts shown on her financial affidavit.
12. The defendant is to retain his 1986 Mazda, his 1994 Honda motorcycle, the Lawrence and Memorial Hospital Credit Union accounts shown on his financial affidavits, and the 401(k) and 403(b) retirement accounts shown on his financial affidavits.
13. The defendant is to receive $9,145 from the $16,000 escrow within twenty days of the date of judgment. The plaintiff is assigned the balance of the escrow account.
14. Each party shall assume and pay the debts itemized on their respective financial affidavits and shall hold the other party harmless thereon.
15. Each party shall pay their respective attorneys fees.
Domnarski, J. CT Page 11028