Sec. 46b-81. (Formerly Sec. 46-51). Assignment of property and transfer of title. - Connecticut Statutes

      Sec. 46b-81. (Formerly Sec. 46-51). Assignment of property and transfer of title. (a) At the time of entering a decree annulling or dissolving a marriage or for legal separation pursuant to a complaint under section 46b-45, the Superior Court may assign to either the husband or wife all or any part of the estate of the other. The court may pass title to real property to either party or to a third person or may order the sale of such real property, without any act by either the husband or the wife, when in the judgment of the court it is the proper mode to carry the decree into effect.

      (b) A conveyance made pursuant to the decree shall vest title in the purchaser, and shall bind all persons entitled to life estates and remainder interests in the same manner as a sale ordered by the court pursuant to the provisions of section 52-500. When the decree is recorded on the land records in the town where the real property is situated, it shall effect the transfer of the title of such real property as if it were a deed of the party or parties.

      (c) In fixing the nature and value of the property, if any, to be assigned, the court, after hearing the witnesses, if any, of each party, except as provided in subsection (a) of section 46b-51, shall consider the length of the marriage, the causes for the annulment, dissolution of the marriage or legal separation, the age, health, station, occupation, amount and sources of income, vocational skills, employability, estate, liabilities and needs of each of the parties and the opportunity of each for future acquisition of capital assets and income. The court shall also consider the contribution of each of the parties in the acquisition, preservation or appreciation in value of their respective estates.

      (P.A. 73-373, S. 20; P.A. 75-331; P.A. 78-230, S. 36, 54.)

      History: P.A. 75-331 authorized court to pass title to real property to either party or a third person or to order sale of property and added provisions relating to transfer or sale of property; P.A. 78-230 divided section into Subsecs. and changed wording slightly; Sec. 46-51 transferred to Sec. 46b-81 in 1979 and references to other sections within provisions revised as necessary to reflect their transfer.

      See Sec. 17b-743 re direction of payments under support order to Commissioner of Administrative Services or local welfare department.

      Annotations to former sections 46-21 and 46-51:

      Court may order payment of alimony by nonresident if he appears by attorney; and alimony may be in money if division of estate impracticable. 5 D. 353; 58 C. 328. Alimony defined; assigned not as a debt but as wife's part of husband's estate; payment enforced by process for contempt. 21 C. 195. Court has no power to assign alimony to a woman divorced for misconduct. 43 C. 424. Court inclines to opinion that an agreement concerning alimony made to facilitate divorce would be void. 46 C. 20; 56 C. 206. On ground of public policy law refuses to enforce a contract, barring alimony or dower, made during coverture. 56 C. 207. Nature of alimony. 77 C. 34; 83 C. 634. Amount rests in court's discretion. 85 C. 478. Contract as to, made before divorce, upheld. 87 C. 377; 123 C. 568. Evidence held insufficient to justify court in altering decree for alimony on ground of husband's fraud as to value of his property. 91 C. 219. Nature of alimony; not a debt which can be factorized; 93 C. 298; as to creditor's bill to reach it. Id., 301. Defendant cannot excuse nonpayment by reason of his own voluntary action. Id., 297. Effect of attachment in divorce action where alimony is awarded in periodic payments. 94 C. 284; 96 C. 568. Purpose of reception of evidence as to title to realty. 98 C. 179. Effect of recommendations of committee: Considerations determining amount of alimony. 99 C. 19, 20. By remarriage wife abandons alimony from former husband. 112 C. 256; 127 C. 515. Statute does not require alimony in all cases. 123 C. 568. Effect of default. Id. Alimony based on agreement is subject to modification. 125 C. 343; 127 C. 510. Death or change in needs of child may be cause for alteration. 125 C. 342. Remedy for enforcement of settlement contracts providing for alimony. 127 C. 514. Usually misconduct by wife after decree does not deprive her of alimony. 131 C. 596. Supplemental judgment does not blot out original provision for alimony. Id., 593. Statute gives court a wide discretion. 134 C. 312. Statute is permissive, not mandatory, and award rests in sound discretion of trial court and will not be interfered with unless it has been abused. 135 C. 163. Order for support of wife pendente lite is a final judgment from which an appeal lies. Id., 333. Court has wide discretion. Id., 408. Standard of living to be provided by alimony pendente lite is that which husband can afford, rather than that to which wife has been accustomed. Id. Cited. 140 C. 254. Decree that husband must make periodic payments of alimony to ex-wife "from his income ... during her life" construed to mean that such payments should continue only during life of husband and there was no valid claim against his estate for alimony accruing after his death. 147 C. 435. An order directing the payment of support and counsel fees is a judgment in personam and constructive service of process on a nonresident defendant is not sufficient to furnish a basis for a judgment in personam even though the defendant had actual notice of the pending action. Id., 561. Court's failure to direct notice to defendant of alimony pendente lite order not fatal where legal separation contested. 151 C. 292. Purpose of alimony pendente lite discussed. Id. Statute authorizing award of alimony is very broad and gives court wide discretion. Statute does not recognize absolute right to alimony. 159 C. 477, 483, 486. Court has broad discretion in awarding alimony. 163 C. 345. Imposition of a duty of support pendente lite only on a husband not unconstitutional as a form of sex discrimination. 165 C. 190. Based on common-law principle of husband's duty to support wife and on the legislature's concept of family relationships. Id. Sec. 46-21 is very broad and gives the court wide discretion. Id., 777, 784. Cited. 166 C. 380. Cited. 168 C. 579; Id., 619. Cited. 171 C. 23, 28; Id., 278. Cited. 172 C. 269; Id., 316; Id., 361. Cited. 173 C. 397. Court has authority to assign husband's interest in marital home to wife despite wife's failure to specifically claim such interest. 174 C. 1. Cited. Id., 361; Id., 602. Cited. 176 C. 222. Cited. 178 C. 212. Cited. 179 C. 213. Discussion of ante nuptial agreements relating to property rights upon dissolution of the marriage. 181 C. 482. Cited. 183 C. 433.

      Cited. 5 CS 224. An allowance for support and counsel fees may not be made to a husband defendant in an action for divorce. 6 CS 467. Judgment, that the defendant turn over to the plaintiff, by way of "alimony", certain household goods, was not subject to modification as it was not an order to pay alimony "from income". 11 CS 205. Cited. Id., 392. The passage of terms of court presents no obstacle in altering the order for the payment of alimony. 12 CS 242. Where no order of alimony was made, there was no order to be set aside or altered. 13 CS 146. Cited. Id., 399. Cited. 16 CS 87. Cited. 21 CS 228. Connecticut court may grant alimony to wife whose husband obtained a valid divorce out of state if the court which granted such divorce decree could so modify the decree. Id., 378. Wife's right to alimony after award may be abandoned and by her laches she may be barred from equitable aid of court to secure payment of arrears through power of court to punish for contempt. 22 CS 50. Cited. Id., 148. Where separation agreement not merged in a Nevada decree, superior court will not enforce Nevada decree as to alimony. Id., 349. Our courts have been held to have no power to assign property of husband to woman divorced for her misconduct. 23 CS 368. Cited. 26 CS 46. Cited. 28 CS 129. Alimony award after judgment invalid. 29 CS 507. Alimony for women only. 30 CS 111. Social custom of woman to change name upon marriage, recognized. Id., 385. Assignment of property. 33 CS 44, 46.

      Wife could not recover attorneys' fees in action brought upon contract between wife and husband. 6 Conn. Cir. Ct. 118, 129.

      Annotations to present section:

      Cited. 177 C. 465. Cited. 178 C. 308; Id., 377. Cited. 179 C. 174; Id., 568; Id., 622. Since the "estate" of the parties comprehends the aggregate of the property and liabilities of the parties, trial court did not abuse its discretion in assigning to defendant sole responsibility for the parties' joint liabilities. 180 C. 184. The fault of a party in causing a marital dissolution is material to the issue of an assignment of property. Id., 212. Portion of dissolution judgment which gave wife option to purchase husband's interest in jointly owned home was an assignment of property and not subject to modification. Id., 285. Court is not required to give equal weight to each of the specified items it considers when assigning property. Id., 528. Court improperly delegated its judicial power by directing the family relations division to divide parties' personal property in the event of their inability to do so. Id., 532. Assignment of property in a marital dissolution rests in the sound discretion of the court. Id., 533. Cited. Id., 705. Cited. 181 C. 492; Id., 622. Cited. 183 C. 35. Trial court's transfer of out-of-state realty discussed. Id., 490. Cited. Id., 512. Cited. 184 C. 406. Cited. 185 C. 141; Id., 156; Id., 275; Id., 491. Cited. 186 C. 167; Id., 191; Id., 211; Id., 709. Cited. 187 C. 70; Id., 249. Cited. 188 C. 232; Id., 385; Id., 736. Cited. 190 C. 173; Id., 491; Id., 657; Id., 813. Cited. 191 C. 468. Cited. 197 C. 1. "... award to defendant of a share of plaintiff's expectancy cannot be sustained as a permissible transfer of property" under statute; judgment of appellate court reversed. 204 C. 224. Cited. 207 C. 217. Cited. 211 C. 485. Cited. 213 C. 686. Cited. 214 C. 713. Cited. 218 C. 801. Cited. 220 C. 372. Cited. 221 C. 698. Cited. 222 C. 32. Cited. 224 C. 776. Cited. 226 C. 219. Order to pay mortgage installments and taxes was intended by trial court to constitute a division of property. Judgment of appellate court in Passamano v. Passamano, 28 CA 854, reversed. 228 C. 85. Judgment of appellate court in Krafick v. Krafick, 34 CA 930, reversed and case remanded to trial court to assign appropriate valuation to pension benefits and reconsider its financial orders. 234 C. 783. Court need not make explicit references to statutory criteria it considered in its decision resolving property and alimony disputes in a dissolution of marriage action; judgment of appellate court in Coffe v. Coffe, 40 CA 178, reversed, see 240 C. 79. Advanced degree (medical degree) is not property subject to distribution upon dissolution of marriage but is properly classified as an expectancy rather than as presently existing property interest. Definition of "property" discussed. 244 C. 158. Based on the evidence, unvested stock options were properly distributed as property under section. 245 C. 508. In accord with prior cases, in distributing property in dissolution proceeding, court must consider all statutory criteria, and no single criterion is preferred over others, but court has latitude to vary weight placed on each item. Id. Right to purchase contents of defendant's rented apartment was properly subject to distribution under section. Id. Date of dissolution of marriage is date on which to value the parties' assets in accordance with prior cases. Id. Plaintiff's personal injury award is a property interest subject to equitable distribution under the statute. 247 C. 356. Unvested pension benefits are property subject to equitable distribution, which court may value on a case-by-case basis among the present value method, the present division method of deferred distribution, and any other valuation method that it deems appropriate in accordance with Connecticut law. 258 C. 733. Trial court did not abuse its discretion by including in the marital property estate the entire amount received by defendant in an employment case. 265 C. 669. For purposes of determining an equitable distribution of property, the court may consider evidence that a spouse dissipated marital assets prior to the couple's physical separation as long as the actions constituting dissipation occur either in contemplation of divorce or separation, or while the marriage is in serious jeopardy or is undergoing an irretrievable breakdown. 287 C. 491.

      Cited. 1 CA 158; Id., 604. Cited. 2 CA 179; Id., 425; Id., 635. Cited. 3 CA 249. Cited. 4 CA 275; Id., 575; Id., 611; Id., 663. Cited. 5 CA 198. Cited. 6 CA 143; Id., 471; Id., 632. Cited. 8 CA 356. Cited 9 CA 240; Id., 432. Cited. 11 CA 195; Id., 369; Id., 610; Id., 653. Cited. 12 CA 525. Cited. 13 CA 185; Id., 270; Id., 300; Id., 651. Cited. 14 CA 195; Id., 296; Id., 541. Cited. 15 CA 292. Cited. 16 CA 193; Id., 412; Id., 680. Cited. 17 CA 480. Cited. 18 CA 166; Id., 333; Id., 622. Cited. 19 CA 65. Cited. 20 CA 812. Cited. 22 CA 136; Id., 248; Id., 337; Id., 392; Id., 410; Id., 806. Cited. 23 CA 330. Cited. 24 CA 509. Cited. 25 CA 41; Id., 595. Cited. 26 CA 527. Cited. 27 CA 364. Cited. 28 CA 208; Id., 854; judgment reversed, see 228 C. 85. Cited. 30 CA 292; Id., 443; Id., 560. Cited. 31 CA 736. Cited. 32 CA 152; Id., 465; Id., 537. Cited. 33 CA 214; Id., 536. Cited. 34 CA 328; Id., 641; Id., 785; judgment reversed, see 235 C. 45. Cited. 36 CA 305. Cited. 37 CA 397. Cited. 39 CA 57. Cited. 40 CA 178; judgment reversed, see 240 C. 79; Id., 533; Id., 562; Id., 697. Cited. 41 CA 716; Id., 728; Id., 861. In determining parties' relative contributions within meaning of statute, court should consider nonmonetary as well as monetary contributions. Court not required to make explicit reference to statutory criteria considered in arriving at decision or to make express findings as to each statutory factor. 48 CA 732. Court has authority to order distribution of property even if neither party requested such order in its prayer for relief. 54 CA 304. Personal injury award in name of both spouses is a property interest within meaning of "property" under section. 57 CA 165. Section authorizes one party to assume joint liabilities of the parties. Id. Although court must consider all statutory criteria when determining appropriate property distribution, it need not give equal weight to or explicitly address each factor. 59 CA 167. Stock options taken as incentive for future services to be performed after final separation not a marital asset. Id., 452. Reaffirmed previous holdings that date of separation may be significant in determining value of assets at date of dissolution. Id., 656. No presumption under Connecticut Constitution Art. I, Sec. 20 (ERA) that property be equally divided between the spouses. Id. Section provides court with jurisdiction to divide the parties' property. 60 CA 337. Court properly classified defendant's business and share bank accounts as "property". 61 CA 791. Court not required to assign a present value to defendant's pension before distributing it. 69 CA 472. Not error for court to award plaintiff a portion of defendant's retirement benefits. Id., 482. Although court has jurisdiction to assign property in connection with this section, that assignment is not modifiable. 70 CA 212. Court does not have continuing jurisdiction over property distributed at the time of dissolution. Id., 772. Pension benefits subject to equitable distribution. 74 CA 120. Assignment of property may only be made at the time of the marital dissolution and is not thereafter subject to modification as are periodic orders. 77 CA 9. Statute authorizes court to issue orders respecting marital property only at the time of dissolution; it does not authorize postjudgment orders for the division of marital property. 79 CA 812. Financial orders cannot be logically inconsistent with factual findings. 82 CA 378. Court did not abuse discretion by awarding plaintiff a portion of stock that vested in defendant after the date of separation. 83 CA 53. Trial court's order requiring sale of marital home and barring parties from purchasing the home was equitable and did not exceed court's statutory authority under section. 84 CA 495. Trial court's order allowing defendant up to fifteen years to pay plaintiff for his share of the marital residence was not abuse of discretion or violation of statutory considerations. 92 CA 678. Trial court properly determined plaintiff did not own the inventory in his antiques business. 102 CA 74. Court did not improperly rely on section in dividing the net partition proceeds. 108 CA 184.

      Unliquidated personal injury action is subject to award under this section. 41 CS 115. Cited. 43 CS 400. Cited. 44 CS 431.

      Subsec. (a):

      Cited. 181 C. 248. Cited. 216 C. 673. Cited. 236 C. 582.

      Cited. 3 CA 25. Cited. 17 CA 431. Cited. 18 CA 589. Cited. 39 CA 162. Cited. 46 CA 87. Principal payments defendant received on purchase money mortgage he held on real estate awarded to him pursuant to dissolution decree is merely an exchange of assets and may not be included in calculation of his income in postdissolution modification proceeding. 53 CA 378. Court rendering a dissolution judgment may order one party to assume joint liabilities of both parties. 57 CA 807. Court was within its discretion, as part of the overall equitable distribution of assets, to divide defendant's 401(k) equally between the parties even if part of it had accrued prior to the marriage. 97 CA 122. Trial court's award of marital residence and 100% of equity in the residence to plaintiff wife did not constitute abuse of discretion where defendant husband was not ordered to pay alimony and retained his pensions free from any claim of the plaintiff wife. 101 CA 106.

      Subsec. (b):

      Cited. 185 C. 180.

      Ascribing a current value to the home, in combination with an order to sell the home, is neither absurd nor prohibited by section. 99 CA 145.

      Subsec. (c):

      Cited. 183 C. 96. Cited. 184 C. 36; Id., 513. Cited. 186 C. 311; Id., 709; Id., 773. Cited. 187 C. 142; Id., 144. Cited. 189 C. 570. Cited. 190 C. 126. Cited. 197 C. 1. Cited. 206 C. 150. Cited. 210 C. 170. Cited. 231 C. 168. Cited. 236 C. 582. Appellate court's conclusion that trial court improperly relied on total length of parties' relationship in crafting its financial orders was supported by record; under this Subsec. and Sec. 46b-82(a), a court shall consider length of parties' marriage, which does not include prior marriages or cohabitation preceding marriage. 280 C. 632. "Dissipation" is the antithesis of "preservation", and a party that dissipates assets detracts from the preservation of those assets, and a trial court has the authority to consider a spouse's dissipation of marital assets when determining the nature and value of property to be assigned to each respective spouse. 287 C. 491.

      Cited. 2 CA 416. Cited. 3 CA 25; Id., 704. Cited. 4 CA 504. Cited. 5 CA 185; Id., 484; Id., 681. Cited. 7 CA 41; Id., 119. Cited. 12 CA 596. "Contemplates nonmonetary as well as monetary contributions." 13 CA 300. Cited. 15 CA 318. Cited. 17 CA 431. Cited. 20 CA 145. Cited. 22 CA 310. Cited. 23 CA 111; Id., 287. Cited. 25 CA 693. Cited. 26 CA 386; Id., 720. Cited. 39 CA 162. Court must consider all statutory criteria but is free to accord whatever weight it determines appropriate to each statutory factor. 86 CA 665. Prior marriage and cohabitation between parties before their remarriage to each other are not to be included when calculating "length of the marriage" in remarriage divorce proceedings. 93 CA 618. Although court must consider all statutory criteria in dividing property in a dissolution action, it does not need to make an express finding as to each criterion. 97 CA 122. Defendant's annual bonus constituted an "amount and source of income" that court should have considered when determining division of marital property and awarding alimony and child support, and matter should be remanded for recalculation of all awards even though child support award was calculated correctly. 98 CA 706. There is no language of presumption in statute that marital property should be divided equally prior to applying statutory criteria. 99 CA 326.

      In dissolution of marriage case, in which plaintiff wife sought greater share in distribution of $25,840 in cash wedding gifts on basis that bride's side had more family and friends in attendance than groom's side, and where there was insufficient evidence of donor's intent, court adopted New York rule for classifying wedding gifts established in Avnet v. Avnet that where there is inadequate evidence of donor's intent, wedding gift is intended as a joint gift unless the gift is appropriate for the use of only one spouse or is earmarked for one particular spouse and because Connecticut is an all property state money received at wedding is "marital property" within meaning of statute, regardless of the donor. 50 CS 11.