Conroy v. Idlibi

          Argued February 20, 2018

         Procedural History

         Action for the dissolution of a marriage, and for other relief, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of New Britain and tried to the court, Carbonneau, J.; judgment dissolving the marriage and granting certain other relief, from which the defendant appealed to this court; thereafter, the court, Carbonneau, J., denied the defendant's motion for modification of alimony; subsequently, the court, Carbonneau, J., denied the plaintiff's motion for contempt. Dismissed in part; affirmed.

          Tareq Al Ahmad, for the appellant (defendant).

          Jeremiah Ollennu, for the appellee (plaintiff).

          Alvord, Keller and Bishop, Js.

          OPINION

          KELLER, J.

         The defendant, Ammar A. Idlibi, appeals from the judgment of the trial court dissolving his marriage to the plaintiff, Katie N. Conroy. The defendant claims that the court erred (1) by finding that neither party bore greater responsibility for the breakdown of the marriage and (2) in making financial awards that were favorable to the plaintiff.^[1] We affirm the judgment of the court.^[2]

         The court found the following facts. In 2005, the plaintiff, when she was eighteen years old and while living in California, began to communicate with the defendant over the internet. The plaintiff was estranged from her mother at the time and living with her grandmother. At first, the plaintiff and the defendant discussed the plaintiff's interest in the defendant's faith, Islam. The topic of conversation quickly shifted from the defendant's faith to marriage. ‘‘About three weeks after meeting online, [the] defendant flew to California, picked up [the] plaintiff, brought her to Connecticut and they married.''

         Initially, the plaintiff and the defendant were happily married. The defendant, a dentist, opened his own practice in 2007. His high income level from this practice enabled the parties to enjoy a lavish lifestyle. They had three children during the marriage.

         Despite initial marital bliss, ‘‘[t]he seeds of this dissolution were sown at the very time the relationship began.'' The plaintiff alleged that the defendant exerted overbearing control over many aspects of her life and that he physically assaulted her. The defendant harbored suspicions that the plaintiff was unfaithful during the marriage. The defendant's dental practice also went through down periods, placing financial strain upon them and forcing the plaintiff to loan the business the total balance of an education fund, about $132, 000, left to her by her deceased father.

         The plaintiff commenced this proceeding on May 19, 2015, seeking to dissolve her ten year marriage to the defendant. Following a trial, the court, on August 15, 2016, rendered a judgment of dissolution, finding that the marriage had broken down irretrievably. The court did not allocate fault for the breakdown of the marriage. Pursuant to the dissolution decree, the court made certain orders for the payment of alimony and the distribution of property.^[3]

         I

         The defendant first claims that the court should have found that the plaintiff was at fault for the breakdown of the ...