Ellen Y. Logan v. Bernard Tompkins (2013)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

This dissolution of marriage case was tried before the court on May 16, 2013.   The parties were each represented by counsel.   Both parties testified.   No other witnesses were called.   The court has carefully considered the statutory criteria as well as the applicable case law regarding the dissolution of marriage, alimony, property issues, attorneys fees, and other attendant issues.   The court has heard all the evidence, observed the demeanor of the parties, and reviewed the exhibits.   Based upon all the credible evidence, the court makes the following findings:

The court has jurisdiction over the marriage.   The plaintiff resided within the state of Connecticut continuously for at least twelve months prior to commencing this action.

The parties were married on November 24, 1986 in Meriden, Connecticut.   There were no children issue of the marriage and no children born to the wife since the date of the marriage.   The wife is not currently pregnant.   Neither party has been the recipient of public assistance.   This is the second marriage for the husband and first marriage for the wife.

The husband is 65 years old and suffers from a number of health issues that impair his ability to be employed in his previous occupations of construction and carpentry.   In addition to a significant hearing impairment and respiratory issues, he suffered a stroke in one eye, which completely eliminated his sight in that eye so that he has no depth perception.   He lost his job two years ago when his employer went out of business.   He elected to collect social security at age 62 to ensure that the parties would have sufficient income to pay their bills.   His current net income from social security is $230.97 per week.   Recently, Mr. Tompkins was able to obtain temporary part time minimum wage employment ($8.25 per hour) with the cleaning staff of a local hotel.   That employment ceased after eight weeks and he is currently seeking similar employment.   Mr. Tompkins has no retirement or pension plans through his previous employments.

The wife is 52 years old and has health issues, including psoriatic arthritis, for which she receives regular treatments.   However, her health issues do not in any manner interfere with her ability to work.   She is employed as team manager in the food service department of a hospital in the area.   She has been employed by the hospital for 25 years.   Her net weekly income from employment is $807.97.   Ms. Logan has a pension plan through her employer, MidState Medical Center that entitles her to a monthly payout of $1,648.92 upon retirement eligibility in September of 2025.

The parties have stipulated, and the court finds, the fair market value of the marital residence to be $103,000.   There current mortgage balance of $1,645.65 will be paid off as of August of this year.   The parties have stipulated that Ms. Logan shall be entitled sole ownership of the marital home after payment to Mr. Tompkins of his share.   Other than the parties' respective automobiles, and their household items which they have already divided, the parties have approximately $6,500 in gold coins and silver certificates and there is a whole life insurance policy on Mr. Tompkins life that Ms. Logan pays for through her employment that has a cash value of $2,010.00.

The parties' marriage was a tumultuous one.   Over the last ten years, there were long periods of two years or more in which the parties did not speak to each other except to respond to or ask limited daily issue questions.   During one of these periods, Mr. Tompkins painted the words “The Roses” on the front door of the house.   In addition, Mr. Tompkins engaged in behaviors intended to intimidate or scare Ms. Logan throughout the marriage, such as leaving a gun on the table, intentionally pointed at the chair where she usually sat.   Their perspectives on their marriage are illustrative of the demise of the marriage.   Ms. Logan testified that she was intimidated by his anger and desperate to leave the marriage for the last ten years.   She claims that despite her continuous threats to end the marriage if his behavior would not change, Mr. Tompkins continued with his angry and intimidating behaviors.

Mr. Tompkins, on the other hand admitted that he occasionally got angry and slammed doors or refused to talk to her, and she him, for years at a time.   However, Mr. Tompkins saw this as a normal marriage, with normal ups and downs.   He denied that he intentionally intimidated her and stated that when he had left the gun on the table after target practice, it was in the locked position.   He also testified that when she indicated that she was uncomfortable with the gun being left on the table, he made sure not to leave it on the table again.   There was no physical violence between the parties that led to the breakdown of the marriage and some of the incidents Ms. Logan testified about predated the marriage.   However, there was a dearth of communication and affection.   Clearly, Mr. Tompkins showed an indifference to the problems in the marriage and made little attempt to remedy those problems because they evidently did not bother him.   Therefore, the court finds that the marriage has broken down irretrievably and that while both parties contributed to the breakdown of the marriage, Mr. Tompkins was more at fault than Ms. Logan.

DISCUSSION

Ms. Logan asks the court to find that Mr. Tompkins' behavior was abusive and intimidating and the reason for the breakdown of the marriage.   She asks the court to allow the parties to go their separate ways, neither party to pay alimony to the other.   She argues that Mr. Tompkins' behavior would be rewarded if this court were to require her to pay alimony.   She asks the court to split the joint assets and allow her to keep her pension and Mr. Tompkins' life insurance policy, free and clear of any claim by Mr. Tompkins.

Mr. Tompkins seeks $250.00 per week in alimony for a period of 12 years.   He also seeks $55,000.00 from the house and an equal division of the remaining assets, including Ms. Logan's pension.

In determining whether to award alimony the court considers the factors set forth in C.G.S. § 46b–82 including “․ the length of the marriage, the causes for the ․ dissolution ․ the age, health, station, occupation, amount and sources of income, vocational skills, employability, estate and needs of each of the parties and the award, if any, which the court may make pursuant to section 46b–81, ․” While the court need not weigh each factor equally, the court must consider all of the factors in determining whether to award alimony.   See, e.g., Caffe v. Caffe, 240 Conn. 79, 82–83 (1997).   The facts in this case certainly do not warrant a determination that Mr. Tompkins' actions that contributed to the breakdown of the marriage would cause this court to simply ignore the other factors set forth in the statute, when the consideration of every other factor weighs heavily in favor of awarding alimony.

Similarly, in considering all the factors set forth in C.G.S. § 46b–81 ¹ regarding the allocation of assets at the time of dissolution, the court cannot find that Mr. Tompkins' behavior or the fact that his chosen employment did not offer the opportunity to acquire a pension would in any manner warrant the denial of a share in Ms. Logan's pension, particularly in light of the facts of this case which show that both parties worked hard throughout the marriage.

ORDERS

Accordingly, the court enters the following orders:

1. The marriage is dissolved on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown.

2. Ms. Logan shall pay alimony to Mr. Tompkins in the amount of $200.00 per week until the sooner of the following events:  the death of either party, Mr. Tompkins' remarriage or September 1, 2025.   Said alimony shall be subject to the provisions of C.G.S. § 46b–86.   Said payments shall be taxable income to Mr. Tompkins and shall reduce the gross income of Ms. Logan.

3. Mr. Tompkins shall quit claim all right title and interest in the marital residence located at 89 Spring Street, Meriden, Connecticut to Ms. Logan.   In exchange, Ms. Logan shall pay to Mr. Tompkins the sum of $51,500.00 no later than 60 days from the date of dissolution.   Upon receipt of the aforementioned sum, Mr. Tompkins shall vacate the premises and remove any and all items listed in the attached schedule A, stipulated division of personal property, which is incorporated herein by reference.   Ms. Logan shall provide Mr. Tompkins with reasonable notice of when she intends to make such payment, if earlier than the 60 day deadline to enable him to locate alternate housing and arrange for the removal of his items.   Thereafter, Ms. Logan shall have exclusive use and occupancy of the residence and she shall be fully responsible for any and all costs and liabilities associated with the residence.   She shall indemnify and hold Mr. Tompkins harmless on any and all liabilities associated with the residence.   Such indemnification shall be in the nature of support and shall not be dischargeable in bankruptcy.

4. Ms. Logan shall transfer to Mr. Tompkins 40 per cent of her Midstate Medical Center Retirement asset valued as of the date of this judgment by way of a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO).   Any cost associated with the transfer including the cost of the preparation of the QDRO shall be paid by Mr. Tompkins.   The court shall retain jurisdiction over this transfer until the QDRO is accepted as a valid order under the plan by the plan administrator.

5. Ms. Logan shall be entitled to retain her automobile, any bank accounts in her name, including the entire joint account, and the two gold krugarans, free and clear of any claim by Mr. Tompkins.

6. Mr. Tompkins shall be entitled to retain his GMC truck, his bank accounts and the remainder of the gold coins and silver certificates.

7. The ING life insurance policy shall be cashed in and Ms. Logan shall be entitled to 70% and Mr. Tompkins 30% of the cash value.

8. Each party shall be responsible for their own debts as listed on their financial affidavit and each shall indemnify and hold the other harmless on any such liability.

BY THE COURT

Maureen M. Murphy, Judge

Schedule A

Aluminum hand truck

All woodworking tools and accessories

Snow blower

One garden hose

1/2 painting supplies (rollers, trays etc.)

Wood bar stool

Chainsaw and accessories

All firearms and accessories

All art supplies and accessories

1/2 cooking utensils (pots, pans, spatulas etc.)

One small cleaver with black handle

1/2 Chicago cutlery

3 coffee tins (Bokar etc.)

Ideal toothpick box

All Reese's tins and box

1/2 buffet cabinet items

Bean pot trivet—Bernie made 2 of them

Defendant's coffee cups

1/2 drinking glasses

1/2 spoons, forks, knives

Coke picture (in bathroom)

Coke picture and light (in living room)

1/2 linens

Defendant's bedroom stuff (except closet) wooden file cabinet/bed, small bookcase

2 wire shelves (in spare room) (2 of 4)

All Steelers' items

2 large tables w/folding legs (in spare room) – there are 4 tables

Unfinished bookcase (in plaintiff's bedroom) – Bernie built it

Digital camera and accessories

Defendant's A/C

1/2 house supplies (toilet paper, windex, medical supplies etc.)

1/2 laundry supplies (soap, laundry baskets, etc.)

1/2 Christmas items (decorations, wrapping paper, etc.) no nutcrackers, 1 tote, coke decorations

1/2 luggage

Blue computer chair (in coke room)

1/2 batteries (stockpiled)

Metal Detector and accessories

Defendant's armoire and nightstand (in plaintiff's bedroom)

1/2 available groceries

Glass display case (from Dani in coke room)

Wood file cabinet

All smoking memorabilia

Emergency crank radio

L.E.D. and military flashlights

2 blue recliners (there are 4 recliners in living room)

Defendant's end table and items on/in it – in living room – they each have one

Small book case (from defendant's mother) located in living room

Computer, printer and accessories (printer stand and paper, software, excluding computer chair and desk)

One floor fan (of 3)

1/2 coat closet items (horse shoes, games, etc.)

Paper shredder and waste basket

2 flags, flag poles and pole light

Military blankets

1/2 office supplies

Defendant's personal belongings (including items already packed in coke room and bedroom)

Defendant to keep all items bought, by defendant, after being served divorce papers

Only items listed to be taken by defendant, everything else to be considered as plaintiff's items.

FOOTNOTES

FN1. 46b–81 states, m pertinent part:  “the court ․ shall consider the length of the marriage, the causes for the ․ dissolution of marriage ․ the age, health, station, occupation, amount and sources of income, vocational skills, employability, estate, liabilities, and needs of each of the parties and the opportunity of each for future acquisition of capital assets and income.   The court shall also consider the contribution of each of the parties in the acquisition, preservation or appreciation in value of their respective estates.”.  FN1. 46b–81 states, m pertinent part:  “the court ․ shall consider the length of the marriage, the causes for the ․ dissolution of marriage ․ the age, health, station, occupation, amount and sources of income, vocational skills, employability, estate, liabilities, and needs of each of the parties and the opportunity of each for future acquisition of capital assets and income.   The court shall also consider the contribution of each of the parties in the acquisition, preservation or appreciation in value of their respective estates.”

Murphy, Maureen M., J.