Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
G.B. Traystman v. L.M. Traystman
SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ARTICULATION AND/OR RECONSIDERATION, POSTJUDGMENT
The court issued its Memorandum of Decision dated August 31, 2011 in the above referenced matter. The defendant filed her motion for articulation and/or reconsideration on September 6, 2011. The court has considered carefully the points raised in said motion. They will be addressed in order.
Alimony Award
The defendant correctly notes a typographical error in the Decision. On page 8 the court is discussing the calculation it used in an effort to determine the plaintiff's contribution to the income of his firm. In subtracting the uncollectible portion of his billing, the court incorrectly stated that the final sum was $218,400 when in fact that was the amount to be deducted from the gross billable amount. The correct number should have been $405,600.1 When the court applies the overhead percentage of 73% used in the Decision, the net amount attributable to the plaintiff is $109,512 for the hours billed. That amount is in excess of, but certainly in line with, the earning capacity attributed to the plaintiff of $120,000. The court finds no reason to alter its decision relative to the alimony based on the regrettable, but simple typographical error.
Legal Fees for the Defendant
The defendant represents to the court that her expense for the work performed by Mr. John Villano was actually $10,440 and not $1,972.50 cited in the Decision. The amount cited by the court was the amount indicated on Mr. Villano's bill that was submitted to the court after the proceedings had concluded. The other arguments made by the defendant for her legal fees have already been considered by the court in its original decision. The court declines to reconsider this portion of its decision.
Retirement Accounts
The court did not divide the retirement assets owned by the plaintiff because they were relatively minor and because his alimony obligation had no term limitation. The court finds no reason to reconsider that portion of its orders.
The Ultimate Sale of the Marital Home
The defendant seeks the court to articulate its orders regarding the sale of the marital home in 2021. More specifically she asks the court if the current obligations are refinanced so as to remove the plaintiff's liability and if he is not entitled to any reimbursement for repairs, could she simply keep the property and not sell it. That is certainly a reasonable alternative to the original orders of the court and it achieves the same purpose as was intended by the court. The court will articulate said orders to provide that additional alternative.
Equity Line of Credit
The defendant is inserting into her motion testimony regarding the lending practices of the bank involved that was not part of the court record. Additionally, she is asserting that the credit line is currently inaccessible due to the amount previously borrowed and that is also outside of the record. Accordingly the court will not consider that portion of the motion.
Wage Withholding Order
The defendant asks the court to secure the plaintiff's alimony obligation with an immediate wage withholding order. There is no evidence that the plaintiff, an officer of the court, will not obey the court's orders. Request denied.
Exchange of Tax Information
The defendant asks the court to order the exchange of tax information on an annual basis. Request denied.
SO ORDERED.
Adelman, J.
FOOTNOTES
FN1. The court found that the plaintiff billed 40 hrs. per week on average at the rate of $300 per hour. That would equal gross billable hours in the amount of $624,000. Subtracting the assumed uncollectible rate of 35% or $218,400 would result in $405,600.. FN1. The court found that the plaintiff billed 40 hrs. per week on average at the rate of $300 per hour. That would equal gross billable hours in the amount of $624,000. Subtracting the assumed uncollectible rate of 35% or $218,400 would result in $405,600.
Adelman, Gerard I., J.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: FA104050338
Decided: September 26, 2011
Court: Superior Court of Connecticut.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)