Behrns v. Behrns

2 Citing cases

  1. Simpson v. Simpson

    306 A.3d 477 (Conn. App. Ct. 2023)

    Although not at issue in the present appeal, we note that parties generally cannot agree to modify court-ordered child support obligations on their own without involving the court. See Eldridge v. Eldridge, 244 Conn. 523, 530–32, 710 A.2d 757 (1998) (reiterating general proposition that court orders must be complied with until modified by court and upholding trial court’s determination that provision in dissolution decree providing for modification upon specified increase in defendant's income not self-executing); Behrns v. Behrns, 80 Conn. App. 286, 289–90, 292, 835 A.2d 68 (2003) (applying Eldridge holding to provision in separation agreement and concluding that "party seeking to alter payments must seek the assistance of the court" rather than engaging in self-help), cert. denied, 267 Conn. 914, 840 A.2d 1173 (2004).Section 4.2 of the agreement provides in relevant part: "From the [defendant's] anticipated bonus or profit sharing from his employment received on or after January 1, 2016, which he usually receives in January of each year … the [defendant] will pay to the [plaintiff] 9 percent of his gross bonus/profit sharing so long as the [defendant] is obligated to pay child support for two children; and, the sum of the 6 percent of his gross bonus/ profit sharing when there is only one minor child for whom the [defendant] is obligated to pay child support. …"

  2. Paulette v. Paulette

    FA134032425S (Conn. Super. Ct. Dec. 31, 2015)

    A court order must be obeyed until it has been modified or successfully challenged. Culver v. Culver, 127 Conn.App. 236, 242, 17 A.3d 1048 (2011), Eldridge v. Eldridge, 244 Conn. 523, 530, 710 A.2d 757 (1998), Behrns v. Behrns, 80 Conn.App. 286, 289, 835 A.2d 68 (2003), cert. denied, 267 Conn. 914, 840 A.2d 1173 (2004). ORDER