Visitation with grandchildren over a parent's objection

When grandparents are seeking visitation with grandchildren over a parent's objection they have to prove that they had a parent-like relationship and that a denial of visitation would cause real and significant harm to the grandchild. Grandparents were successful in the 2017 case of Boisvert v Gavis 65 Conn.L.Rptr. No. 2, 81 where they used a psychologist to testify that interrupting the child's relationship with the grandparents would cause real harm to the child.

Parents have immunity from suit for injuries caused to their minor children by the parent

Parents have immunity from suit for injuries caused to their minor children by the parent's negligence. This immunity was also applied to contractual claims in Delmedico v Panda Properties, 65 Conn.L.Rptr. 1 Nov '17 However, a parent's liability for injuries that the child causes to others remains limited by a statutory amount.

Distribution of pension and retirement benefits in Divorce

Connecticut Court still retains jurisdiction to enforce the retirement pay distribution

In most divorce cases the distribution of pension and retirement benefits are not finalized for years. A recent Connecticut case of Shaw v. Shaw 62 Conn.L. Rptr. No. 20, 2016 indicates that the Connecticut Court still retains jurisdiction to enforce the retirement pay distribution even when both spouses have left the state. In this case, one spouse refused to cooperate and tried to avoid payment by leaving Connecticut.

Paternity Challenges - No Limitations When Fraud Present

Paternity when fraud or duress is involved

In a recent Paternity case the Superior Court ruled that there is no limitations period for a father to challenge a judgment of paternity when fraud or duress was involved. See Tata v Levine, CT Sup Ct 64 Conn.L. Rptr 19, 2017. However, the father must present clear and convincing evidence that he was deceived into signing paternity papers.

Best Interest of Child in Determining Paternity

In a paternity matter a Superior Court held that a court has the inherent authority to open an acknowledgment of paternity solely on the grounds that an accurate determination of paternity would be in the child's best interests. Often men agree to paternity in the absence of a DNA test, have regrets and later obtain DNA results showing that they are not the biological father.
Muhammad v Murphy 62 Conn.L. Rpte 3, 2016

Pages