2003 Ct. Sup. 6730
No. FA 02 0731492Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of Hartford at Hartford
May 14, 2003
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
ROBAINA, JUDGE.
This is an action claiming a dissolution of marriage and other relief which was filed in court on September 19, 2002, and bears a return date of October 8, 2002. This matter was tried before the court on April 17, 2003.
The court makes the following findings:
The court finds that there is proper service, that it has jurisdiction, that all statutory stays have expired. The court finds that the plaintiff, Marie Zipadelli, whose maiden name was Marie Magnoli, married the defendant David Zipadelli on August 22, 1975. The court further finds that there are no minor children issue of the marriage. The parties did have guadruplets born to them in June of 1984, and those children have reached the age of majority, attending the University of Connecticut at Storrs. The court further finds that the marriage of the parties has broken irretrievably.
Based upon the testimony offered at trial, the court finds the plaintiff is in good health. She was born in 1952 and has a bachelor’s degree as well as a master’s degree in art. She and the defendant met in 1973 while they were students at Central Connecticut State University. They dated in excess of one year prior to the time of their marriage. At the time of their marriage neither had assets or debts of any substance. The parties were married for approximately nine years prior to having children. During that time they each worked in advancing their respective careers. In addition, they accumulated savings, traveled, purchased their first home, and enjoyed what could objectively be described as a comfortable lifestyle.
The defendant also has a college degree as well as an advanced degree. He is a high school teacher and has been so for approximately twenty-seven years. During the course of the marriage of the parties, the defendant handled the finances of the parties. CT Page 6731
In approximately 1981, the plaintiff wife changed careers from teaching to employment at Cigna Health Care. She has been employed at Cigna Health Care since that time, and except for an interruption for her pregnancy and the raising of her children, has worked there since that date.
The parties are loving, caring parents. Each of them described the strain of having four children born at the same time, and each described the sacrifices made by both of them in order to raise the children during different stages of their life. Each of the parties fairly acknowledges the contribution of the other in that respect.
Unfortunately, the stress of marriage was not overcome by these parties. At several different times, they engaged in counseling and attempted to address the issues that they had. The efforts to resolve the issues were made in good faith, but ultimately were not successful. The plaintiff moved out of the home in January of 2002, some nine months prior to the filing of this action.
At present, the plaintiff is employed as a project manager at Cigna Health Care. Her salary is approximately $81,000.00 per annum, inclusive of her bonus. The defendant is employed as a high school teacher. His financial affidavit shows present earnings of approximately $64,500.00 per annum. His gross salary for the coming year will be $67,500.00.
The parties own a home at 33 Kingsbridge Road in Avon, Connecticut. That home was purchased from joint funds, and has been lived in by the parties since approximately 1991 or 1992. The court finds that the value of that property is $400,000.00. The court also finds that the property does have a number of conditions which diminish its value, and that the sum of $30,000.00 would suffice to remedy those conditions sufficient to restore the property to fair condition. Accordingly, fair market value is found at $370,000.00. There is a mortgage outstanding on that property in the amount of $44,267.00.
The other assets owned by the parties are listed on their financial affidavits. As to those assets, there is no substantial disagreement with respect to their valuation. As to the deferred compensation or retirement assets of the parties, an expert witness by the name of James A. Gobbs, an actuary, evaluated both the plaintiff’s and the defendant’s deferred compensation plans. Mr. Gobbs estimates that the accrued benefits payable to the plaintiff from Cigna and her social security projected benefits have a present value of $82,154.00 and $73,125.00, respectively. (See Plaintiff’s Exhibit 11.) Mr. Gobbs also analyzed the defendant’s retirement benefits under the Teacher’s Pension System. He opined that CT Page 6732 the present value of the defendant’s benefits are $356,724.00. The court accepts those findings.
The court has considered the statutory criteria with respect to alimony, property division, and other factors relevant to this matter. The court hereby enters the following orders:
The marriage of the parties is hereby dissolved.
Neither party shall pay alimony to the other.
The plaintiff shall pay the sum of $1,549.11 toward the current American Express bill. The balance of that bill shall be paid equally by the parties. The parties shall otherwise pay the respective debts as listed on their financial affidavits unless otherwise specified herein. The parties shall pay equally any presently outstanding student loan incurred on behalf of the minor children.
The parties shall continue to assist the children in obtaining financing for the completion of their undergraduate education, or up to their attaining the age of twenty-three years, whichever is first. The parties shall cooperate in the timely exchange of information necessary to complete financial aid forms and applications. The parties shall cooperate in filing information in order to maximize available financial aid for the children, and to receive financing upon favorable terms to the extent possible. The parties shall be equally responsible for Signature Loans or other loans undertaken for the benefit of the minor children, in the event that there is a default on the part of said children.
The defendant shall continue to provide medical insurance for the benefit of the minor children as said is available as a condition of his employment. In the event that a cost is incurred for said insurance, the parties shall share that cost equally. The parties shall share equally the children’s unreimbursed or uninsured medical, dental and optical expenses.
Each party shall maintain his or her health, life and car insurance.
Each party shall retain the motor vehicle currently in their possession.
The parties shall submit to mediation with the Family Relations Division of the Superior Court for purposes of division of personal property. The court will retain jurisdiction of any issues not resolved in CT Page 6733 that fashion.
The wife shall transfer to the husband the 1986 Plymouth Voyager, and he shall hereafter be responsible for any expenses associated therewith.
The wife shall retain the jewelry listed on her financial affidavit.
The wife shall also retain the Cigna Health Care Options.
The husband shall retain his interest in the property known as 127 Grove Hill in Kensington, Connecticut free of any claim or interest in the plaintiff wife.
The remaining assets of the parties shall be divided as follows:
To the wife:
Savings account $ 3,000.00
Teacher’s Retirement Account 16,384.00
401k 45,697.00
Cigna Pension (present value) 82,154.00
Social Security Retirement (present value) 73,125.00
To the husband:
IRA Prudential $ 4,089.00
IRA Webster 23,866.00
IRA People’s 4,384.00
Teacher’s Retirement Account (present value) 356,724.00
TSI 13,943.00
The defendant husband shall have the option of retaining the jointly owned marital property as his property. In the event that he chooses to do so, the plaintiff wife shall be obligated to quitclaim her interest in the property to him. In exchange for that quitclaim, the defendant husband shall pay to the wife the sum of $254,189.00. Said quitclaim shall take place on or before sixty days from the date of this judgment. CT Page 6734
In the alternative, the property shall be listed for sale with a licensed real estate agent agreed upon by both parties. The parties shall cooperate in such steps as are reasonably necessary for the purpose of listing the house and obtaining a favorable sale price for said house. Upon sale of the marital home, the wife shall receive the first $182,646.00. The proceeds thereafter shall be divided equally between the parties. The court shall retain jurisdiction over any and all issues with respect to the sale of said house. The defendant husband shall have the right to live in the property during such time as it is listed for sale. He shall be responsible for continuing to pay the mortgage, insurance, and other expenses associated with the occupancy of said home.
Each party shall be responsible for the payment of their own attorneys fees.
Each party shall be entitled to two deductions for the children if such are available through applicable Internal Revenue Service regulations.
Antonio C. Robaina, J. CT Page 6735