December 9, 2024
Recent Case Affirms Longstanding Divorce Law Concepts and Lessons for Anyone Contemplating Divorce
The facts of Wethington v. Wethington weren’t unusual. A 2010 marriage, one child born during the marriage, two unhappy spouses for quite some time due largely to Mr. W’s excessive drinking and physical and verbal abuse of Mrs. W. Shortly before Mrs. W started divorce proceedings in 2019 Mr. W disposed of a substantial portion of the family’s assets. The couple divorced in 2022 after a four day trial. Mr. W appealed various parts of the trial court’s orders resulting in a 2024 decision of the Appellate Court. It is this Appellate Court decision that affirms two longstanding divorce law concepts and provides valuable lessons for anyone contemplating divorce.
First, the Automatic Orders are not effective on the defendant in a divorce case until he or she is actually served with papers – the divorce summons and complaint. Mr. Wethington’s disposition of assets would have violated the Automatic Orders, constituted contempt of court and potentially resulted in favorable orders for Mrs. Wethington had he done so after being served. However, the Appellate Court correctly held Mr. W did not violate the orders since he disposed of assets before being served.
Lesson One: Predivorce planning may have provided Mrs. W with some protection against her husband’s disposal of assets. Meeting with a lawyer early on, even before the final decision to divorce has been made, can be beneficial. If nothing else, educating yourself about the law and what you might reasonably expect if the divorce ultimately occurs is valuable.
Second, the Appellate Court affirmed the trial court’s decisions to award Mrs. W 60% of the property while also requiring Mr. W to make approximtately $100,000 in payments to Mrs. W out of his 40% share of the assets. Although a roughly equal division of property between spouses is more often than not the outcome, there is no 50%-50% law or rule in Connecticut. Instead, the law provides a list of factors to be considered that influence how a court will divide a couple’s property. Here, the Appellate Court relied on the trial court’s finding that Mr. W was primarily responsible for the breakdown of the marriage, one of the factors, due to his drinking and abuse.
Lesson Two: Although typical, a 50%-50% property division is not legally justified in every divorce. An experienced divorce lawyer should be able to analyze the legal factors impacting property division as these apply to your particular situation and provide you with a range of probable outcomes. You can then decide how you would like to proceed to resolve the property division component of your divorce.
« Back to all news