LaFaci-Zitzkat v. Zitzkat

Connecticut Appellate Court

LaFaci-Zitzkat v. Zitzkat

562 A.2d 527, 19 Conn. App. 805, 1989 Conn. App. LEXIS 263

CourtConnecticut Appellate Court

DecidedJuly 13, 1989

Docket7285

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 562 A.2d 527 (LaFaci-Zitzkat v. Zitzkat) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Appellate Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

LaFaci-Zitzkat v. Zitzkat, 562 A.2d 527, 19 Conn. App. 805, 1989 Conn. App. LEXIS 263 (Colo. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The defendant in this action for dissolution of marriage has appealed from a pendente lite order of the trial court.

Subsequent to the filing of this appeal, and just prior to oral argument in this court, the plaintiff and the defendant entered into a separation agreement. That agreement was incorporated into a final judgment dissolving the marriage of the parties.

“Pendente lite orders necessarily cease to exist once a final judgment in the dispute has been rendered because their purpose is extinguished at that time.” Connolly v. Connolly, 191 Conn. 468, 480, 464 A.2d 837 (1983). Pendente lite orders do not survive the rendition of judgment. See Tobey v. Tobey, 165 Conn. 742, 745, 345 A.2d 21 (1974). The judgment of dissolution “disposed with finality of all interlocutory orders.” Saunders v. Saunders, 140 Conn. 140, 146, 98 A.2d 815 (1953); see also Yontef v. Yontef, 185 Conn. 275, 291, 440 A.2d 899 (1981); Caracansi v. Caracansi, 4 Conn. App. 645, 652, 496 A.2d 225, cert. denied, 197 Conn. 805, 499 A.2d 56 (1985).

Accordingly, because this case has gone to final judgment, the pendente lite order has ceased to exist, thereby rendering this appeal moot.

The appeal is dismissed.

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

Per Curiam.

The defendant in this action for dissolution of marriage has appealed from a pendente lite order of the trial court.

Subsequent to the filing of this appeal, and just prior to oral argument in this court, the plaintiff and the defendant entered into a separation agreement. That agreement was incorporated into a final judgment dissolving the marriage of the parties.

“Pendente lite orders necessarily cease to exist once a final judgment in the dispute has been rendered because their purpose is extinguished at that time.” Connolly v. Connolly, 191 Conn. 468, 480, 464 A.2d 837 (1983). Pendente lite orders do not survive the rendition of judgment. See Tobey v. Tobey, 165 Conn. 742, 745, 345 A.2d 21 (1974). The judgment of dissolution “disposed with finality of all interlocutory orders.” Saunders v. Saunders, 140 Conn. 140, 146, 98 A.2d 815 (1953); see also Yontef v. Yontef, 185 Conn. 275, 291, 440 A.2d 899 (1981); Caracansi v. Caracansi, 4 Conn. App. 645, 652, 496 A.2d 225, cert. denied, 197 Conn. 805, 499 A.2d 56 (1985).

Accordingly, because this case has gone to final judgment, the pendente lite order has ceased to exist, thereby rendering this appeal moot.

The appeal is dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

562 A.2d 527, 19 Conn. App. 805, 1989 Conn. App. LEXIS 263, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lafaci-zitzkat-v-zitzkat-connappct-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack