Jakaboski v. Guinta

Connecticut Superior Court

Jakaboski v. Guinta

294 A.2d 87, 29 Conn. Super. Ct. 498, 29 Conn. Supp. 498, 1972 Conn. Super. LEXIS 181

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedApril 27, 1972

DocketFile No. 13359

StatusPublished

This text of 294 A.2d 87 (Jakaboski v. Guinta) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jakaboski v. Guinta, 294 A.2d 87, 29 Conn. Super. Ct. 498, 29 Conn. Supp. 498, 1972 Conn. Super. LEXIS 181 (Colo. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

The question raised by this motion is whether the Superior Court has exclusive jurisdiction *Page 499 of matters involving support for minor children subsequent to a foreign decree of divorce or whether such an action may be maintained in the Court of Common Pleas.

There appear to be no Supreme Court cases directly in point but the Court of Common Pleas has equitable jurisdiction and, historically, has heard and decided such matters. Broderick v. Broderick,7 Conn. Sup. 60; Przybylo v. Przybylo, 13 Conn. Sup. 474.

Certainly if the minor were a nonresident and the defendant a resident, the Court of Common Pleas would have jurisdiction under the provisions of the Uniform Reciprocal Support Act. General Statutes §§ 17-327 — 17-355b.

The motion to erase is denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The question raised by this motion is whether the Superior Court has exclusive jurisdiction *Page 499 of matters involving support for minor children subsequent to a foreign decree of divorce or whether such an action may be maintained in the Court of Common Pleas.

There appear to be no Supreme Court cases directly in point but the Court of Common Pleas has equitable jurisdiction and, historically, has heard and decided such matters. Broderick v. Broderick,7 Conn. Sup. 60; Przybylo v. Przybylo, 13 Conn. Sup. 474.

Certainly if the minor were a nonresident and the defendant a resident, the Court of Common Pleas would have jurisdiction under the provisions of the Uniform Reciprocal Support Act. General Statutes §§ 17-327 — 17-355b.

The motion to erase is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.2d 87, 29 Conn. Super. Ct. 498, 29 Conn. Supp. 498, 1972 Conn. Super. LEXIS 181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jakaboski-v-guinta-connsuperct-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack