GOLDBERG, JUDGE TRIAL REFEREE.
Both parties appeared and were represented by counsel. All statutory stays have expired and the court has jurisdiction.
Plaintiff initiated this action in September 2004 alleging that she and the defendant intermarried on October 5, 2002 at Griswold, Connecticut; that her maiden name was Cynthia Colmer; that she lived in Connecticut for at least twelve months prior to the filing of this action; that there are no minor children issue of this marriage; that neither party has received public assistance during the marriage; and that the marriage has broken down irretrievably without any hope of reconciliation.
Plaintiff is a 39-year-old woman who is presently employed at a supermarket in the deli-bakery department with gross weekly earnings of $440.00. She had been similarly employed prior to her marriage to the defendant. Upon marriage and for a relatively brief period prior thereto, she joined the defendant in operating his business known as "Stable Down Under" which was a horse training and horse riding business. Defendant is a 44-year-old man who had been operating his business for four or five years prior to his marriage to the plaintiff. The business was operated on a farm owned by defendant's mother and the horses and equipment related to the business were maintained at the stable on the farm.
Defendant's financial affidavit indicates a gross weekly income of $600.00 from the business and additional $200.00 per week for assisting his mother in her floral business which was paid by way of not paying any rent for the apartment occupied at the farmhouse. Plaintiff alleged that she worked full-time in the business during the marriage and claims that she helped increase the amount of business. Upon instituting this dissolution action in September 2004, she ceased working in the business, but CT Page 11740 continued to occupy, with her child from a prior marriage, an apartment at the farmhouse without payment of rent or utilities. This occupancy continued until on or about March 1, 2005 when she vacated the apartment and moved to her present living quarters.
During the 22 months of the marriage in which plaintiff was actively engaged in the defendant's business, she received no salary. In final argument, plaintiff's counsel requested a payment to her of $15,000 based on half the value of the assets of business acquired during the marriage plus compensation for her services rendered during the 22-month marriage, and the defendant would retain his business. Defendant's counsel contended that monies were expended from the business account to make payments on some of plaintiff's pre-marital debts and also that she lived rent-free for six months after she ceased participation in the business. Accordingly, defendant claims she was adequately compensated and that she should receive no additional payment.
Having been in the business for only approximately two years does not qualify plaintiff as an expert on the value of the horses utilized in defendant's business and there was no other expert testimony on the value of the horses. In addition, in her testimony, plaintiff stated she was making no claim for any horses that were acquired by the defendant prior to the marriage. Based on the testimony offered by the defendant, most of the inventory of horses were acquired prior to the marriage, and regarding the couple of horses acquired during the marriage, the court is unable to determine the value of the horses due to the lack of reliable expert testimony.
The court finds that the allegations of the complaint have been proven and that a decree of dissolution may enter due to the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. After reviewing the testimony of the parties and the respective financial affidavits and the relevant statutes, the court enters the following findings and orders:
1. Neither party requested any alimony, and no alimony is ordered for either party.
2. That the reasonable value of plaintiff's services during the marriage was $20,000.00; that the business made payments totaling $11,833.48 on behalf of plaintiff's pre-marital debt (Defendant's Exhibit 2) which should be credited against the amount due for CT Page 11741 services rendered; that defendant should further be credited with $3,600.00 as the value of the use and occupancy by the plaintiff of the marital apartment at the farm. Accordingly, a net payment of $4,566.52 is due plaintiff for services rendered.
3. Plaintiff shall execute all documents necessary to transfer title to the horse trailer and the Chris Craft boat to the defendant, and defendant shall pay the sum of $800.00 for such property and shall hold her harmless from any expenses related thereto.
4. Said total sum of $5,366.52 shall be paid by defendant to plaintiff within 30 days of the date of dissolution.
5. Defendant shall retain the business known as "Stable Down Under" together with all the horses and equipment related thereto, and plaintiff shall execute any and all documents necessary to affect such transfer of title to the horses and equipment.
6. Defendant is to assume and is ordered to pay the grain bill and any other debts of the business. With respect to the remaining debts listed on the respective financial affidavits, each party shall be responsible for payment of their own debts.
J.H. Goldberg, JTR CT Page 11741-a