Kittle v. Kittle, No. Fa88-0351764s (Sep. 24, 1998)

1998 Conn. Super. Ct. 11813
CourtConnecticut Superior Court
DecidedSeptember 24, 1998
DocketNo. FA88-0351764S
StatusUnpublished

This text of 1998 Conn. Super. Ct. 11813 (Kittle v. Kittle, No. Fa88-0351764s (Sep. 24, 1998)) 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
Kittle v. Kittle, No. Fa88-0351764s (Sep. 24, 1998), 1998 Conn. Super. Ct. 11813 (Colo. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

ORDER CT Page 11814
Motion to Reopen and Modify Judgment is denied.

The judgment calls for alimony for a non-modifiable term and amount. The Stipulation for Judgment and Judgment contain no language which alludes to the termination of alimony upon the death, remarriage or cohabitation of the wife. The plain language of the parties' contract controls. Willis v. Willis, 14 CLT (9/26/88). Rau v. Rau, 37 Conn. App. 209, 211 (1995); Sheehanv. Balasic, 46 Conn. App. 327 (1997), cert. granted, 243 Conn. 945 (11/6/97). The language of the parties' agreement and the judgment of the court is unambiguous.

Anne C. Dranginis Judge, Superior Court

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

Related

Rau v. Rau
655 A.2d 800 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1995)
Sheehan v. Balasic
699 A.2d 1036 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1998 Conn. Super. Ct. 11813, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kittle-v-kittle-no-fa88-0351764s-sep-24-1998-connsuperct-1998.