Light v. Light

Connecticut Superior Court

Light v. Light

2 Conn. Super. Ct. 27, 2 Conn. Supp. 27, 1935 Conn. Super. LEXIS 188

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedMay 6, 1935

DocketFile #45880

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Conn. Super. Ct. 27 (Light v. Light) 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

Light v. Light, 2 Conn. Super. Ct. 27, 2 Conn. Supp. 27, 1935 Conn. Super. LEXIS 188 (Colo. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

BOOTH (JOHN RUFUS), J.

The order passed on March 12th, 1935 whereby the defendant was awarded $2100.00 by way of alimony and for support of her minor child was evidently passed upon the assumption that the plaintiff’s income was $4,472.00 annually as appears from schedules offered in evidence, which schedules counsel agree were submitted to the court at the time of trial.

From the evidence offered during the hearing of the present motion, however, the Court is of the opinion that the plaintiff’s annual income is not $4,472.00, but is approximately $3,500.00.

Applying the same percentage used by the Court in its prior award to the figures now found to represent the plaintiff’s real annual income, the resulting figures instead of being $2,100. would be approximately $1,400. This alone would *28 unquestionably justify a modification of the existing order. In addition, however, the Court has, as it must in such cases, re-examined the whole question of the resources and needs of the parties and therefore has concluded that under the circumstances the sum of $1,400. annually by way of alimony and support of the minor child is just and equitable.

The decree is therefore modified to the extent indicated in this memorandum.

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

BOOTH (JOHN RUFUS), J.

The order passed on March 12th, 1935 whereby the defendant was awarded $2100.00 by way of alimony and for support of her minor child was evidently passed upon the assumption that the plaintiff’s income was $4,472.00 annually as appears from schedules offered in evidence, which schedules counsel agree were submitted to the court at the time of trial.

From the evidence offered during the hearing of the present motion, however, the Court is of the opinion that the plaintiff’s annual income is not $4,472.00, but is approximately $3,500.00.

Applying the same percentage used by the Court in its prior award to the figures now found to represent the plaintiff’s real annual income, the resulting figures instead of being $2,100. would be approximately $1,400. This alone would *28 unquestionably justify a modification of the existing order. In addition, however, the Court has, as it must in such cases, re-examined the whole question of the resources and needs of the parties and therefore has concluded that under the circumstances the sum of $1,400. annually by way of alimony and support of the minor child is just and equitable.

The decree is therefore modified to the extent indicated in this memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Conn. Super. Ct. 27, 2 Conn. Supp. 27, 1935 Conn. Super. LEXIS 188, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/light-v-light-connsuperct-1935.