Daniel Lynch v. Laurie Lynch (2012)

Memorandum of Decision

Having heard all argument and evidence and reviewed all applicable case law, Statutes and Practice Book provisions, Plaintiff's Motion for Counsel Fees, Post-judgment, court document # 243, is hereby denied.

Plaintiff's argument in Paragraph four of his motion claims that “the court has denied the plaintiff's request for any and all financial relief from the overwhelmingly burdensome orders which obligate him well beyond his available net income.”   In short, the plaintiff is attempting to appeal the trial court's orders regarding alimony child support that were issued as part of the September 14, 2009 dissolution judgment.   Previous motions to stay financial orders and motion for counsel fees have already been decided by the trial court.   Plaintiff's argument seems to be that since the court refused to modify judgment or issue stay regarding support orders;  he is financially burdened and entitled to attorney fees.

Plaintiff in the present case is not asking for fees to continue the appeal, in fact he has appellate counsel.   He seeks counsel fees so that he may continue to file post-judgment motions with this court while his appeal of the trial court decision is pending in the appellate court.   The policy of awarding attorney fees is based on the belief that one spouse should not be deprived of rights to continue the litigation due to lack of funds.   The court should and has considered the criteria as set forth in Unkelbach v. McNary, 244 Conn. 350 (1998);  Maguire v. Maguire, 222 Conn. 3 (1992);  see also Kunajukr v. Kunajukr, 83 Conn.App. 478 (2004).   Plaintiff's financial situation falls far short of this standard and his motion is denied.

Klatt, J.

Klatt, Corinne L., J.