2006 Ct. Sup. 7028
No. HHB CV 03 0523441SConnecticut Superior Court Judicial District of New Britain at New Britain
April 11, 2006
RULING ON MOTION FOR ARTICULATION (2/27/06)
JULIUS J. KREMSKI, JUDGE TRIAL REFEREE.
Defendant requests this court to articulate its January 31, 2006 decision.
The court complies, as follows:
With regard to the defendant’s requests in paragraphs 1 through 5:
1. Yes.
2. The court considered it but also noted that the defendant subsequently made payments to the plaintiff or in her behalf.
3. The court noted that the defendant had a history of making payments to or for the plaintiff both before and after the plaintiff executed the General release.
4. No. The court considered those payments as separate payments made by defendant to plaintiff in consideration of her needs and their long term relationship.
5. The court did determine that the parties periodically would separate and would reunite, and that at the time this action was brought and heard, the parties were living apart. The court has no specific information about the times these occurred. CT Page 7029