DocketNumber: File No. 10374
Citation Numbers: 17 Conn. Super. Ct. 105, 17 Conn. Supp. 105
Judges: DALY, J.
Filed Date: 7/6/1950
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 1/12/2023
In paragraph 2 of the plaintiff's motion it is alleged that the plaintiff "obtained judgment herein on June 8, 1935 against defendant herein, as amended, in the sum of $12,285, as will further appear from said file, and said judgment is still unpaid and unsatisfied." As stated in the "Judgment" dated June 8, 1935, and in the "Judgment" dated May 29, 1936, the plaintiff claimed "Fifteen Thousand (15,000) Dollars damages, an order compelling the defendant to continue to make payments in accordance with the terms of a certain separation agreement and such other equitable relief as the Court might deem necessary in the premises."
In her motion the plaintiff prays that "this Court adjudge defendant in contempt of this Court."
An appeal from the judgment, dated June 8, 1936, was taken by the defendant. The opinion is reported in
At page 288 in referring to the agreement of December 10, 1924, which was annexed to and referred to in the judgment of divorce granted by the Danish court the court said; "That it was afterward referred to and embodied in the divorce decree did not change its character from an unsealed to a sealed instrument."
At page 290 the following appears: "There is error, the judgment is set aside and the case remanded with direction to enter judgment for the plaintiff to recover damages only, being the principal sum awarded in the original judgment with interest to the date of the new judgment." *Page 107
Counsel for the plaintiff claims that the case of German v.German,
In this case there was no decree for alimony. Judgment was rendered upon the separation agreement of August 23, 1923. Accordingly the defendant is not in contempt of court and the motion is denied.