Preview:

****************************************************** The ``officially released'' date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ``officially released'' date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ``officially released'' date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ******************************************************

LAURA E. MATURO v. FRANK A. MATURO (SC 17776)
Norcott, Katz, Palmer, Vertefeuille, Zarella, Schaller and McLachlan, Js.* Argued September 19, 2008--officially released May 4, 2010

Robert M. Shields, Jr., with whom were Kenneth J. Bartschi and, on the brief, Wesley W. Horton, for the appellant (defendant).

Steven D. Ecker, with whom, on the brief, was George C. Jepsen, for the appellee (plaintiff). Campbell D. Barrett, Steven R. Dembo, Justine Rakich-Kelly and Felicia Depaola, certified legal intern, filed a brief for the Children's Law Center of Connecticut, Inc., as amicus curiae.

Opinion

ZARELLA, J. The defendant, Frank A. Maturo, appeals1 from the judgment of the trial court dissolving his marriage to the plaintiff, Laura E. Maturo, and entering certain financial orders. The defendant claims that the trial court abused its discretion when it (1) ordered him to pay the plaintiff a fixed percentage of his annual net cash bonus as child support, (2) ordered him to pay the plaintiff a fixed percentage of his annual state and federal income tax refunds as additional alimony and child support, and (3) divided the parties' marital assets. The plaintiff responds that the child support award was proper and is consistent with General Statutes

Download Maturo v. Maturo.pdf

Connecticut Law