Eileen Perkins v. Michael Perkins (2010)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR MODIFICATION, PENDENTE LITE

On July 6, 2010, an evidentiary hearing on the defendant's Motion for Modification, Pendente Lite, was held.   The motion was filed June 14, 2010, and was heard in conjunction with the plaintiff's Motion for Contempt.   The defendant seeks to modify certain financial orders previously imposed by the court.   The order at issue is discussed in a memorandum of decision filed with regard to the plaintiff's Motion for Contempt.   The defendant testified, and exhibits were introduced.   The parties submitted updated financial affidavits.   The dissolution action is scheduled for trial in September 2010.

“To obtain a modification, the moving party must demonstrate that circumstances have changed since the last court order such that it would be unjust or inequitable to hold either party to it.   Because the establishment of changed circumstances is a condition precedent to a party's relief, it is pertinent for the trial court to inquire as to what, if any, new circumstance warrants a modification of the existing order.”  Borkowski v. Borkowski, 228 Conn. 729, 737-38 (1998).

The evidence presented by the defendant at the hearing of this matter did not satisfy the defendant's burden.

After consideration of the relevant statutory criteria, the evidence, and case law, the Motion for Modification, Pendente Lite, is denied.

ELPEDIO VITALE, JUDGE

Vitale, Elpedio N., J.