From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tyson-Gibson v. Gibson

Connecticut Superior Court Judicial District of Fairfield at Bridgeport
Nov 22, 2011
2011 Ct. Sup. 23962 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2011)

Opinion

No. FA10-4033291 S

November 22, 2011


MEMORANDUM OF DECISION


The plaintiff whose birth name was Valerie Tyson and the defendant intermarried at Farmville, Virginia on February 14, 1998. There is one minor child issue of this marriage born on May 24, 2000. Her name is Raeven Gibson. Neither of the parties is or has been the recipient of state assistance and the Court has the requisite juris. The marriage has broken down irretrievably and is dissolved.

This is a marriage of approximately 13 years. However the parties separated in 2005, thus the parties lived together as husband and wife for approximately 7 years. The wife is 46 years old and the husband is 52. Both of the parties testified and neither complained of any egregious fault that led to the breakdown of the marriage.

In view of the ages of the parties and the length of time they actually lived together as husband and wife any alimony order would normally be minimal and for a limited period of time. Unfortunately the wife suffers from serious debilitating medical conditions so lifetime alimony is warranted. At the same time the husband has a limiting physical condition so the amount of the alimony awarded to the wife is based to some degree on husband's present income and assets. While the wife seeks a substantial portion of husband's personal injury settlement the Court is satisfied that the minor child who is only eleven needs protection. Her education and welfare are to be prioritized.

The defendant in 2004 sustained serious physical injuries as a result of a serious construction accident in Westport. He eventually settled a claim for personal injuries for $250,000.00. However, the accident occurred after the parties had separated. She assigned any interest she might have in the proceeds of the settlement for loss of consortium to her husband.

During the course of this trial a great deal of testimony was presented with respect to the husband's personal injury action that resulted in a $250,000 settlement. The wife claims that she originally agreed to the settlement but subsequently changed her mind. From the proceeds of this action there is left approximately $26,500 that has been placed in an interest bearing account and is being paid in the form of alimony at the rate of $102.00 per week for a period of five years. The payment started approximately one year ago. Whether or not the amount of settlement was reasonable or how the disbursements were made and to who the payments were made was not the function of this Court to decide. This is not the appropriate forum. The Court has the sum of $26,500 to deal with.

Defendant paid to his mother in excess of $59,000 which represented part of the proceeds from his personal injury case. He claims his mother continues to advance him sums but does not know how much she holds on his behalf. He also claims that the sums she has advanced to him are hers and the entire $59,000 has long ago been used. The Court has problems with defendant's credibility but plaintiff has failed to establish that defendant is in fact holding any of the $59,000 that came from the proceeds of his personal injury case. Both of the parties have precarious health problems. Their 11 year daughter, Raeven Gibson lives primarily with her mother and is a good student. The plaintiff receives social security disability in the amount of $675 and an additional $257 is paid to the mother on behalf of Raeven. The $26,500 is presently being held in an interest bearing account by an attorney who represented him in his personal injury action. Some conflict developed between the plaintiff and the attorney after defendant's personal injury case was resolved. Neither of the counsel in the dissolution motion that has been contentious are appropriate fiduciaries. The Court appoints Attorney Ellen Morgan as the fiduciary. The fiduciary shall hold the $26,500.00 in an interest bearing savings account to be used primarily for the high school and/or college education for Raeven until she is 22. At that time if there are funds remaining they shall be paid over to Raeven. The fiduciary shall have broad and unfettered powers to use said sums for Raeven's health and education needs should they arise. She shall also have the discretion to use same for any short fall that may occur due to any asset or income diminution of the parties.

ORDERS

The Court has carefully considered the criteria set forth in Conn. Gen. Stats. Sec. 46b-81 and 82 as well as the assets, liabilities, income and expenses of the parties in entering its orders.

1. The marriage of the parties has broken down irretrievably and dissolved.

2. The parties shall have joint custody of the minor child with reasonable and liberal visitation to the husband.

3. The husband shall pay alimony to the wife in the amount of $50.00 per week until such time that the wife remarries, dies or enters into a conjugal relationship as defined by statute.

4. Pursuant to the Child Support Guidelines the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the sum of $31.00 per week until the child is 18 or if still in school until June after the child's eighteenth birthday.

5. The wife shall have exclusive ownership and possession of the home at 29 Carver Street in Bridgeport and shall be responsible for any claim of debt related thereto.

LIABILITIES

Each party is responsible for their liabilities set forth on their respective affidavits. In addition the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the sum of $4,467.00 which represents one-half of the $8,834 loss of the Mazda and the loan to Mr. Gibson.

The wife presently has health insurance coverage. Husband shall have access to same pursuant to COBRA for three years from date of judgment at his own expense.

The Court shall retain jurisdiction regarding post-secondary education pursuant to statute.


Summaries of

Tyson-Gibson v. Gibson

Connecticut Superior Court Judicial District of Fairfield at Bridgeport
Nov 22, 2011
2011 Ct. Sup. 23962 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2011)
Case details for

Tyson-Gibson v. Gibson

Case Details

Full title:VALERIE TYSON-GIBSON v. RODNEY GIBSON

Court:Connecticut Superior Court Judicial District of Fairfield at Bridgeport

Date published: Nov 22, 2011

Citations

2011 Ct. Sup. 23962 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2011)

Citing Cases

Young v. Rudd

' In the Pennsylvania case of Gibson v. Tyson, 5 Watts 34, the grantor reserved to himself all minerals or…