Opinion
File No. 52137
In an action to enforce payment of alimony decreed by the courts of a sister state, the plaintiff's motion for weekly payments pendente lite on account of the defendant's alleged obligation to her, is denied. Whether there is an obligation on the part of the defendant such as that alleged is one of the issues in the case, and to grant the plaintiff's motion would be to decide that issue in favor of the plaintiff in advance of trial.
MEMORANDUM FILED FEBRUARY 15, 1939.
Sidney Vogel, of South Norwalk, for the Plaintiff.
Wilson Hanna, of Danbury, for the Defendant.
Memorandum of decision on motion for payments pendente lite in action to enforce foreign decree awarding alimony.
The plaintiff secured a decree of divorce with alimony in the State of New York. She comes into this state, where now resides the defendant, to enforce in this court the decree of alimony decreed by the New York court. She has been heard by this court in two trials, and in each of these two instances the judgment of the court has been reversed ( German vs. German, 122 Conn. 155; German vs. German, 125 id. 84); and the case is now pending in this court to be heard upon its merits.
The plaintiff now moves that pendente lite this court order the defendant to pay to her weekly sums on account of his obligation to her. Whether or not there is such obligation, in law or equity, is one of the issues in the case now pending. Granting the plaintiff's motion would be tantamount to deciding this issue in the plaintiff's favor before trial of the entire case, including this issue, upon its merits. This the court cannot do.