Pease v. Pease, No. Fa89 0100486 S (Jan. 8, 2001)
Opinion of the Court
1. That CASEY PEASE reached his majority as of September 9, 1995.
2. That BRIAN PEASE reached his majority on January 21, 2000, and has graduated from high school, and that it is equitable and appropriate that child support cease effective July 1, 2000.
3. That the parties entered into a voluntary agreement that child support would be reduced to $150.00 per week, and that said sums were to be paid through the Support Enforcement in Connecticut; and that payments were made pursuant to that agreement, and that no arrearage existed as of the time the plaintiff moved to California.
4. That the defendant relied upon the voluntary agreement of the parties in making the child support payments in connection therewith, that by accepting said payments without protest the plaintiff gave her assent to the agreement, and that she should be estopped from enforcing the original court order.
5. That the defendant should be entitled to an appropriate credit and/or refund for any overpayments as follows: CT Page 532
a. $200.00 per week from July 1, 2000, including $418.38 withheld from his paycheck on September 28, 2000;
b. $50.00 per week for the period commencing with the wage withholding by the State of California through and including July 1, 2000;
c. $768.00 which represents the intercepted tax refund; and
d. Any sums over and above the foregoing which have been applied toward the arrearage attributable to the court order dated May 1, 1995, and which this court specifically finds to be non-existent.
1. That all child support obligations shall cease effective July 1, 2000.
2. That the defendant should be entitled to an appropriate credit and/or refund for any overpayments as follows:
a. $200.00 per week from July 1, 2000, including $418.38 withheld from his paycheck on September 28, 2000;
b. $50.00 per week for the period commencing with the wage withholding by the State of California through and including July 1, 2000;
c. $768.00 which represents the intercepted tax refund; and
d. Any sums over and above the foregoing which have been applied toward the arrearage attributable to the court order dated May 1, 1995.
3. The court hereby reserves jurisdiction to enter any further orders necessary to clarify and/or implement the foregoing.
CT Page 533 THE COURT
SHAY, J.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.