KLACZAK, J.T.R.
This is a limited contested dissolution of marriage action which was tried on August 11, 2009. The plaintiff was represented by counsel. The defendant was self-represented.
The complaint in this case was returnable on September 30, 2008. The parties intermarried on October 30, 1992 at Manchester, Connecticut. The plaintiff has resided continuously in Connecticut for at least one year prior to the commencement of this action. There are two minor children issue of the marriage, namely Tealla M. Rautenberg, born July 28, 1993, and Dalton J. Rautenberg, born October 17, 1997. Neither party has received assistance from any state or local agency for themselves or said children.
The Court finds that this marriage has broken down irretrievably.
The Court, in issuing its orders has fully considered the criteria of Connecticut General Statutes § 46b-81 and 46b-82, as well as the evidence, applicable case law, the demeanor and credibility of the witnesses, the plaintiff's proposed orders and the argument made by the parties in reaching the findings, decisions and orders set forth herein.
The defendant's lack of cooperation in responding to discovery requests is appalling. He has failed to disclose his assets and has disregarded a court order compelling him to produce requested financial documents at a trial management conference. In fact he failed to attend the scheduled trial management conference. Nor did he provide those documents at trial. He did not have a current financial affidavit at trial but rather he relied on a financial affidavit dated February 23, 2009 which he claimed reflected his current financial condition of zero income and $943 in weekly expenses. This defies logic and credulity.
His attitude is further exemplified by the fact that he has not taken CT Page 14694 the required parenting education class (nor has he asked for a waiver of costs for the program). Also indicative of his character and veracity is his criminal record which includes larceny convictions. In one case he used his own son's social security number in a fraudulent scheme. And, if this background is not enough of a taint he has a history of substance abuse, including both alcohol and drugs.
For all these reasons, as well as his demeanor in court, this Court can give very little credence to his testimony.
In her proposed orders, the plaintiff asks the Court to base its orders on the defendant's earning capacity which she argues is $75,000 per year from his landscaping business. She bases that figure on a workers' compensation award to the defendant of $800 per week which, she claims, represents 66% of his regular earnings. However, that award was made for a 2005 date of loss. The Court cannot accept that as a basis for his present earning capacity. On the other hand there was testimony that the defendant is back in the landscaping business under a new name. (The defendant himself admitted using the name "Uriano" as an alias.) What is known is that he has landscaping experience and ran his own business. He is likely capable of doing landscaping at the present time and should reasonably have an earning capacity of $50,000.
In contrast, the plaintiff has worked since the beginning of their married life. She ran a daycare for a time and is presently employed as a secretary for an agency of the State of Connecticut, earning $43,000 per year which (unlike the defendant's income) is provable and reportable.
ORDERS Dissolution:
The Court finds the marriage has broken down irretrievably. Judgment shall enter dissolving the marriage on said grounds.
Custody and Access:
1. The mother shall have sole custody of the two minor children Tealla (7/28/1993) and Dalton (10/17/1997).
2. Father shall immediately engage in a substance abuse evaluation followed by the recommended treatment program with random urine screens, including inpatient if appropriate.
CT Page 14695 3. Father's access with Tealla shall occur in a therapeutic setting at the discretion of Tealla.
4. Father's access with Dalton shall be supervised at KidSafe one hour per week.
5. Father shall engage in parenting classes at KidSafe.
6. Both parents shall participate in the children's counseling as deemed appropriate by the therapist.
7. Father may motion the Court to modify the parenting plan when he has successfully completed long-term outpatient relapse prevention treatment and is able to demonstrate a substance abuse free lifestyle.
Child Support:
1. Current: The defendant shall pay child support of $200 weekly for both children.
2. Arrearages:
(i) There is a previously found arrearage of $1,935 as of March 28, 2009.
(ii) There is an accrual of $130 per week from 3/28/08 to 8/11/09 (20 weeks) for a total of $2,600.
(iii) Since March 23, 2009 order, Defendant has made the following payments of $260; 3/28; 4/11; 4/25 and 5/16 resulting in an arrearage of $1,560.
(iv) Total arrearage of $6,095 to be paid at a rate of $200 per month commencing August 15, 2009.
Alimony:
The defendant shall pay alimony of $1.00 per year for twelve years. Alimony is modifiable as to term and amount.
Medical/Dental/Daycare:
The plaintiff shall maintain the minor children on her present medical insurance policy or the equivalent, as provided by her employer. The plaintiff shall be responsible for 61% of all unreimbursed medical and CT Page 14696 dental expenses for the minor children and the defendant 39%. They shall share work-related daycare expenses in the same percentages.
Medical/Dental/Daycare Arrearage:
The defendant has the following arrearages:
a. From 10/20/09-3/23/09; $410 times 42% = $172.20
b. From 3/23/09 to present: $240 times 20% = $48.00
c. Daycare from 3/23/09 to 6/18/09 (12 weeks) @ $110/week: $1320 times 20% = $264.00
d. Payment of $484.20 shall be made on or before September 30, 2009.
Tax Matters:
a. The defendant shall reimburse the plaintiff the sum of $4,417 which was intercepted by the IRS. Said reimbursement shall be in monthly installments of $500 commencing on September 26, 2009.
b. The defendant shall indemnify and hold plaintiff harmless from the IRS debt. In the event of any seizure by IRS, defendant shall reimburse said amount within fifteen (15) days.
Property Settlement:
The husband shall quitclaim to the wife all of his right, title and interest in the real estate known as 35 Birch Drive, Andover, Connecticut forthwith. The wife shall NOT hold the husband harmless on all expenses in connection with said real estate including but not limited to, the mortgage and taxes thereon. The husband shall be responsible for all other liens on the property.
Pension:
The parties shall each retain their own pension benefits, free and clear of any claims of the other.
Attorneys Fees:
The defendant shall pay the sum of $3,000 toward his wife's attorneys fees at the rate of $250 per month until paid in full. This includes the CT Page 14697 defendant's failure to appear at the July 2, 2009 pre-trial, August 3, 2009 court date and August 6, 2009 pre-trial.
Education Orders:
The Court retains jurisdiction of the costs of post-secondary education in accordance with Connecticut General Statutes § 46b-56c.
Cobra:
The plaintiff shall cooperate in making COBRA medical insurance benefits available to the defendant at his expense.
CT Page 14698