Opinion
No. FST FA 00 0180892
July 7, 2006
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR MODIFICATION AFTER JUDGMENT (121)
The parties' marriage was dissolved on April 25, 2002 after a limited contested trial. The defendant served the present motion with order for hearing on the plaintiff in her hands on April 26, 2006 for hearing assigned for May 8, 2006. Although each party had been represented by counsel during the trial each appeared pro se at the hearing.
The defendant alleged that the judgment had ordered him to pay $466 weekly periodic alimony and $214 weekly child support and that he has since retired with income changed. He asks the court to decrease the amount of child support and the amount of alimony. He has filed a financial affidavit for the current motion listing weekly income as follows:
Pension $375 401K $250 Annuity $375
for a total of $1,000 less total deductions of $300 for a net of $700 weekly.
At the court's suggestion the defendant took the stand to present his case. He testified that he had been a member of the IBEW Electrical union for a little over 34 years. The court in examining his 2002 financial affidavit, observed that the assets section listed only his 401(k) and an annuity. The following inquiry then occurred:
THE COURT: And you had a defined benefit pension?
THE WITNESS: Correct. CT Page 12453
THE COURT: Is that defined benefit pension in addition to the 401K plan?
THE WITNESS: Yes. It's a separate issue, and there is also an annuity.
THE COURT: And it was separate from the annuity?
THE WITNESS: Correct. It's three individual items.
THE COURT: I don't see anything in the decision about the defined benefit pension.
THE WITNESS: I agree; I don't see anything there. It's my interpretation that was my benefit.
The case has twice been assigned for resumption of the hearing but neither party appeared on either day.
The defendant's failure to disclose his vested defined benefit pension on his 2002 financial affidavit or to the trial court is contrary to the basic principle stated in Billington v. Billington, 220 Conn. 212, 595 A.2d 1377 (1991), cited by Sabrowski v. Sabrowski, 95 Conn.App. 625 (2006) at page 630.
A rough estimate of the value of the said pension at the time of the dissolution was approximately $200,000. It appears to be a marital asset but it was not disclosed. The defendant cannot be permitted to take advantage of the court or of the plaintiff. The court will refer the file to the State's Attorney office for review of the defendant's failure to disclose.
The defendant's motion for modification is denied.