Superior Court of Connecticut, Judicial District of Waterbury, Waterbury
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
Irene P. Jacobs, J.
The trial of the above contested dissolution was held on April 24, 2015. Both parties were represented by counsel. Both parties testified. Numerous documents were entered into evidence.
Prior to trial, the court granted the plaintiff's April 23, 2015, Motion in limine to Preclude evidence not produced by the defendant as it pertained to Items 3 (defendant's account statements for the past twenty-four months), 4 (loans or withdrawals from the defendant's 401 savings account), 9 (summary of all Brazilian property) and 10 (summary of all items purchased by the defendant for the purpose of resale in this country or in Brazil).
The following motions were pending at the time of trial:
(1) The defendant's April 20, 2015 pendente lite Motion for Contempt, alleging that the plaintiff had stopped paying the mortgage on the marital home;
(2) The defendant's April 20, 2015 pendente lite Motion for Alimony;
(3) The plaintiff's December 22, 2014 Motion for Contempt (#112), alleging the defendant's failure to pay child support as ordered by this court on December 19, 2014.
FINDINGS AND ORDERS
After reviewing the court file, the financial affidavits of the parties, the Proposed Orders of the parties, the Child Support Guidelines Worksheet, and the Affidavit Concerning Children, after considering the statutory factors and applicable case law regarding alimony, child custody, child support, health insurance, educational support orders, equitable distribution of property, and attorney fees, and after having considered the testimony and evidence presented at trial, the court finds and orders as follows:
1. The court has jurisdiction over this matter and all statutory stays have expired. In hand service was effectuated on September 28, 2014.
2. The parties married on April 8, 2001 in Woodbury, Connecticut.
3. The plaintiff resided in Connecticut for twelve months prior to the institution of this action.
4. As alleged in the Complaint, and not denied by the defendant, the parties are the parents of one child, namely Matthew, born on November 22, 2000.
5. Matthew has been a recipient of Husky Insurance. The State has filed Proposed ...