Tatyana Samsonenko v. Gennadiy Samsonenko (2010)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

On August 24, 2010, an evidentiary hearing was held on several post-judgment motions.   The Court's rulings on these motions are as follows:

Motion No. 134-Defendant's Motion to Open and Set Aside.

(An order entered on June 6, 2005.)   Wherein the parties agreed that the plaintiff shall be entitled to claim their minor child, Nicole, as a tax exemption.

The defendant now claims a mutual mistake was made in 2005 by the parties in that they believed Nicole was required to be a taxable dependant in order to be covered by the plaintiff's medical policy.

The agreement and order of June 6, 2005 is silent as to why the agreement was made and the defendant has not shown there was a mutual mistake.   The parties are contentious toward each other and the Court questions the defendant's candor as it relates to the issues raised in this matter.

In addition, this order was entered into five years ago and the plaintiff has always provided health insurance for the child.   It appears likely that, if contested, she would still take the child as a dependant.   The motion to open and set aside is denied.

Motion No. 142:  The defendant seeks to modify the child support order claiming that it is “double dipping” for him to pay both child support and half of her college expenses.

The judgment provides for child support of $100 per week, to share equally in the cost of extra-curricular activities, and to pay one-half of the child's college costs and expenses.   It is illogical to think that child support ends when college begins.   The child, Nicole is gifted and was accepted into college after her sophomore year of high school.   She still comes home from college in northern Massachusetts.   The plaintiff does all the transportation, pays for her food, clothing and home maintenance.   With all scholarships the annual costs of college is in the neighborhood of $12,000 annually.   Most people would consider that a bargain.

There is no valid reason to look favorably on the defendant's motion to modify.   It is denied.

Motion No. 138.-The plaintiff's Motion for Contempt.

The plaintiff has established that there is an arrearage owing to her for payments toward Nicole's college expenses.   Her records are meticulously kept and the Court accepts them as accurate.

The amount owed by the defendant to equalize the college costs to date is $1,225.16.  (See exhibit 8.) The defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff said amount within thirty (30) days.   The Court is not satisfied the arrears are of a flagrant nature and will not award counsel fees at this time.   The Court will give the defendant the benefit of the doubt on the claimed $91.27 for back child support.

It is so ordered.

Klaczak, J.T.R.

Klaczak, Lawrence C., J.T.R.