Veras v. Veras, No. Fa80 018 54 37 S (Sep. 4, 1997)
Opinion
These statutes empower a family support magistrate or superior court judge to hold obligors in contempt when they fail to pay pre-majority child support that is past due. Nothing in the foregoing statutes limits the court's power to enforce pre- majority support orders once the child reaches the age of majority. Therefore, this court's "has jurisdiction in a contempt proceeding to enter an order to pay child support on unpaid installments which accrued before the child reached majority, where the proceedings were commenced after the child reached majority. The jurisdiction of the court is a continuing one, and the mere emancipation of the child should not serve to cancel the arrearage. "Arnold v. Arnold,
The defendant's narrow construction of the applicable statutes is unwarranted given that the Connecticut Supreme Court "has construed broadly statutes providing for parental support for minor children." Guille v. Guille,
In view of the foregoing, the decision of the family magistrate is affirmed.
MORAN, J.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1998 Conn. Super. Ct. 10265 (Veras v. Veras, No. Fa80 018 54 37 S (Sep. 4, 1997)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.