Gerard Sevigny v. Mary Sevigny (2015)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

This is an action commenced by the plaintiff husband by complaint made returnable to this court on November 13, 2012 seeking a dissolution of marriage, an equitable division of the marital assets, an equitable division of the marital debts, attorneys fees and such other further relief as the Court deems equitable and just.   The defendant, appearing by counsel filed a cross complaint on July 12, 2013 seeking a divorce, a fair division of property and debts, a name change and anything else the court deems fair.   This matter was tried to the court over a period of three days.   Both the plaintiff and the defendant were present for trial and each was represented by counsel.   Testimony was received from the plaintiff, the defendant and other witnesses.   Exhibits were entered by the court.   The parties also filed financial affidavits.

From the testimony and evidence produced at the trial and after assessing the credibility of the witnesses, the court finds the following facts to have been proven.

The parties were intermarried on November 23, 1974 in Thompson, Connecticut.   The parties do not have any minor children and there are no children of this marriage under the age of twenty-three years.   The plaintiff and the defendant have resided in this state for more than one year immediately prior to the date of the complaint.   Neither party is receiving any state, federal or local assistance.   The court finds that it has jurisdiction over the parties and the marriage.

The plaintiff husband is fifty-seven years old.   At the age of sixteen years old he dropped out of high school and was married when he was seventeen years old to the defendant.   He has worked during the marriage in a wide variety of jobs including driving trucks and cement mixers, and working as a mechanic.   At the present time, the plaintiff is in prison where he has been since June 2012.   However, his income tax return for 2010 reveals that he earned $46,879.24 from the Town of Killingly.   His 2011 income tax return also reveals that he earned $47,322.93 from the Town of Killingly.

He was sent to prison in June 2012 where he currently remains.   He is a convicted felon.   A review of his criminal record includes his being convicted on June 27, 2013 with an offense date of June 30, 2012 for a charge of carrying a pistol without a permit, a felony, for which he was sentenced to five years in jail, execution suspended after three years with three years of probation.   He was also convicted on June 27, 2013 with an offense date of June 30, 2102 for a charge of illegal possession of a weapon in a motor vehicle, a felony, for which he was sentenced to three years in jail, execution suspended after one year with probation for three years.   In that case a criminal protective order was issued in favor of the defendant wife against the plaintiff husband which includes a full no contact order as well as the plaintiff being ordered to stay 100 yards away from the wife.   That order is in effect until August 26, 2043.

The plaintiff was also convicted on August 27, 2013 with an offense date of January 19, 2013 for violation of a protective order, a felony, for which he was sentenced to one year in jail.   In addition, he was also convicted on August 27, 2013 with an offense date of March 3, 2012 for a misdemeanor, threatening in the second degree for which he was sentenced to one year in jail.

Upon his release from prison, he is intending to file a disability claim but if he cannot receive disability he will find a job.   According to the plaintiff, doesn't know when he will be released from prison.   He had attempted an early release application but was denied.   The defendant testified that the plaintiff will be released from prison in September 2016.

The plaintiff testified that he believed that he was a good husband, never threatened his wife nor hurt her.   The plaintiff does acknowledged that he drank during the marriage but never used drugs.   He also testified that as a result of his criminal convictions, he is unable to lawfully possess firearms.   As to the cause of the breakdown of the marriage, the plaintiff believes that his wife was having an affair during the marriage.   The plaintiff presented no credible evidence to support his claim.   In addition, the plaintiff testified that at the house there was large amounts of money in envelopes that the wife controlled as well as funds in a coffee can.   The defendant testified that she withdrew money from the parties joint checking account and kept $8,500.00 in cash at the home in order to pay bills.

The plaintiff did use marital funds for the purposes of hiring attorneys for his numerous criminal matters.

The plaintiff has also made no financial contribution to the defendant wife or pay any household bills since his incarceration in 2012.

The defendant wife is fifty-nine years old.   She quit high school but ultimately received her high school diploma.   She is currently employed as a homemaker assisting elderly and disabled clients.   Her amended financial affidavit reveals that she grosses $445.00 from said employment and nets $431.00 a week.   She also receives $54.00 a week from rental income.   Her 2010 income tax return reveals that she earned $14,925.40 from Classic Homemakers.   Her 2011 income tax return reveals that she earned $15,351.70 from said employment.   She also earned $218.00 from unemployment compensation that year.

The defendant wife worked during the marriage in a number of different jobs but mostly for dry cleaners.   She did not work for the first six years after her daughter was born to be a full-time homemaker but entered the workforce again when the child was enrolled in school.

She testified that the first three years of the marriage were fine.   However, the husband began to display anger towards her which ultimately was the cause of the breakdown of the marriage.   She also testified that she is currently being treated for Post–Traumatic Stress Disorder as a result of being subjected to the anger of her husband.   The defendant wife also testified that the plaintiff abused alcohol during the marriage.   His actions resulted in criminal convictions against the plaintiff which resulted in the court issuing a full no contact and 100 yards stay away protective order against the plaintiff in favor of the defendant which does not expire until August 26, 2043.

The defendant testified that she has been solely responsible for paying the household bills since the husband's incarceration in 2012 and has received no contribution from her husband towards said bills.   She acknowledged that she utilized funds from the parties joint accounts to pay off her car as well as other household bills including credit cards.

The parties own property at 89 Laurel Hill Road, in Brooklyn, Connecticut.   The plaintiff had an appraiser testify in court and introduced as an exhibit his appraisal report valuing the property at $295,000.00 as of March 11, 2014.   The defendant had an appraiser testify in court and introduced as an exhibit his appraisal report valuing the property at $260,000.00 as of March 26, 2014.   The court finds the value of the property to be $270,000.00.   The defendant currently resides in said property having been previously awarded exclusive possession of it by court order of April 17, 2013.

The parties also own property at 27 Railroad Street, Putnam, Connecticut that they obtained from the defendant's mother as a gift.   The plaintiff had an appraiser testify in court and introduced as an exhibit his appraisal report valuing the property at $40,000.00 as of March 11, 2014.   The defendant in her financial affidavit submitted with the court values the property at $50,000.00.   The plaintiff's proposed orders for this case requests that the court value the real estate at $50,000.00 The court values said property at $50,000.00.   The property is currently being rented to two tenants.

The parties have been married over forty years.   The court finds that the plaintiff's husband's conduct during the course of the marriage was the primary cause of the breakdown of the marriage.   He has anger, alcohol issues and criminal conduct that has damaged his relationship with his wife and diminished his ability to maintain a healthy marriage.   The court finds that both parties have contributed financially to the marriage.   The plaintiff and the defendant have both worked during most of the marriage excluding the defendant providing child care to the parties children when they were not in school.   The plaintiff has always earned significantly more money than the defendant as a result of his capabilities that are more financially lucrative than the defendant's.   During the latter portion of the marriage, the plaintiff's conduct caused him to become a convicted felon resulting in his incarceration since 2012.   There is a criminal court no contact protective order against him in favor of his wife that will expire in 2043.   His incarceration has been detrimental to the marriage and his inability to provide income to the marriage during his incarceration has left the defendant in a difficult financial position.   She has been given the responsibility of maintaining the parties' assets as well as paying the bills by herself for the past several years.   As to the cause of the breakdown of the marriage, the court does not find the plaintiff to be credible and does find the defendant to be credible.   As to the financial aspects of the marriage, the court does not find either party to be credible.

After taking into consideration the statutory criteria set forth in the Connecticut General Statutes as well as the applicable case law and applying the same to the evidence, the court enters the following orders.

1. A decree is entered dissolving the marriage of the parties on the grounds of an irretrievable breakdown.

2. The plaintiff shall convey to the defendant by quitclaim deed any and all interest he may have in the premises located at 89 Laurel Hill Road, Brooklyn, Connecticut.   The defendant shall be solely responsible for the real estate taxes and insurance on said property and other costs associated with said property.   The court orders that the defendant pay the plaintiff the sum of $50,000.00 payable upon the first of the following events:  the sale of the premises, the death of the defendant, the refinance of the property or October 1, 2017 whichever shall first occur.   The defendant shall execute a mortgage deed and note with no interest in favor of the plaintiff to secure said debt, to be executed contemporaneously with the receipt of the quitclaim deed from the plaintiff as arranged by the parties' attorneys.

The defendant shall convey to the plaintiff by quitclaim deed any and all interest she may have in the property known as 27 Railroad Street in Putnam, Connecticut.   The plaintiff shall be solely responsible for the real estate taxes and insurance on said property.   The rent and any security deposit shall be adjusted under customary closing practices as of May 1, 2015.

3. The plaintiff shall retain ownership of the 2002 Ford F 350 automobile, the 2007 Triumph America motorcycle, the closed trailer (2009 Victory), and the open trailer as listed on his financial affidavit, free and clear of any claim of the defendant.   The defendant shall convey to the plaintiff, all right title and interest she may have in said property should the title be in joint names.   The plaintiff shall assume and hold the defendant harmless from any encumbrances on said property including but not limited to loans, taxes and insurance.

The defendant shall retain the 2010 Toyota automobile, and the Massey Ferguson 390 Tractor, free and clear of any claim of the plaintiff.   The plaintiff shall convey to the defendant, all right title and interest he may have in said automobile and tractor, should the title be in joint names.   The defendant shall assume and hold the plaintiff harmless from any encumbrances on said automobile and tractor including but not limited to loans, if any, taxes and insurance.

4. The plaintiff shall retain possession of all tools and tool boxes as listed on the parties financial affidavits.   The defendant shall cooperate with the plaintiff in arranging the transfer of any of said items in the possession of the defendant.

5. The personal property as attached in the document entitled “Agreed On Personal Property To Be Distributed to Husband” dated March 30, 2015 shall be disbursed in accordance with said agreement attached hereto.

6. The defendant shall retain the ownership of all of the firearms as listed on both the plaintiff and the defendant's financial affidavit which were subject to the court pendente lite order of April 17, 2013 free and clear of any claim of the plaintiff.

7. The parties shall either sell or return the 2006 Springdale Camper to the dealer, whichever they shall agree upon and shall equally share any net proceeds or deficiency equally.   Any property taxes, and insurance expenses on the camper shall be shared equally by the property.   If the parties are unable to agree as to whether to sell or return the camper, the camper shall be returned to the dealer.

8. The defendant shall retain the ownership of the Citizens National Bank account as listed on her financial affidavit free and clear of any claim of the plaintiff.

9. The plaintiff shall be entitled to retain his Roth IRA and ICMARC 547 Deferred Compensation account and the Speedway Motor Stock as listed on his financial affidavit free and clear of any claim of the defendant.

10. The plaintiff may maintain ownership of any of the Honda ATV's that may exist free and clear of any claim of the defendant.

11. The plaintiff shall be solely responsible for the debt to the Department of Correction as listed on his financial affidavit and shall hold the defendant harmless therefrom.

The defendant shall be solely responsible for the debts due U.S. Bank, Kohls, and Chase as listed on her financial affidavit and shall hold the plaintiff harmless therefrom.

12. The plaintiff and the defendant shall be solely responsible for their own medical insurance at their own expense and each party shall be entitled to any medical insurance benefits that may exist under COBRA at their own expenses for the maximum period allowed by law.

13. Each party shall be solely responsible for their own attorneys fees.

14. Neither party is awarded alimony.

15. The defendant's former name of Mary Lavallee is restored.

16. Each party shall promptly execute all documents necessary to effectuate these orders.

17. The plaintiff and defendant shall make arrangements for the transfer of the property in the defendant's possession to the plaintiff as ordered herein utilizing third parties for said arrangements so as not to violate the existing no contact order and both parties shall cooperate in said process.

Graziani, J.

AGREED ON PERSONAL PROPERTY TO BE DISTRIBUTED TO HUSBAND

BROOKLYN HOUSE

LIVING ROOM

Recliner chair

Coffee table

Desk

2 Edge lamps

DINING ROOM

Computer and printer

Microwave

BEDROOM 1

Brown bureau

BEDROOM 2

Full size bed

Bureau

Entertainment Center

TV

Metal desk

Office chair

BASEMENT

All mechanic tools (powered and unpowered) & tool boxes

1 Canopy—tent

2 Filing cabinets with files

Ice fishing gear

ATV titles (if Wife has them)

Yellow kayak

IF LOCATED IN THE BROOKLYN HOUSE

Missy's old computer ¹

NRA material (books in tote containers) ²

PUTNAM HOUSE

KITCHEN

4 Chairs

PANTRY

drier

LIVING ROOM

Chair

Recliner

AGREED ON MOTOR VEHICLES TO BE DISTRIBUTED TO HUSBAND

2009 Victory closed-in trailer

REMAINING PERSONAL PROPERTY, (EXCLUDING VEHICLES, BANK ACCOUNTS, STOCK CERTIFICATES AND FIREARMS) WILL BE DISTRIBUTED TO WIFE

Plaintiff Defendant

Gerald Sevigny Mary Sevigny

Plaintiff's Attorney Defendant's Attorney

Mitchell Lake, Esq. Anna Zubkova, Esq.

FOOTNOTES

FN1. Ms. Sevigny indicates she was unable to find the item as of the execution of this document, however, if it is located in the future, the item will be turned over to Mr. Sevigny..  FN1. Ms. Sevigny indicates she was unable to find the item as of the execution of this document, however, if it is located in the future, the item will be turned over to Mr. Sevigny.

FN2. Ms. Sevigny indicates she was unable to find the item as of this execution of this document, however, if it is located in the future, the item will be turned over to Mr. Sevigny..  FN2. Ms. Sevigny indicates she was unable to find the item as of this execution of this document, however, if it is located in the future, the item will be turned over to Mr. Sevigny.

Graziani, Edward C., J.