Case ID: conn_149/html/0727-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bhima Sturtevant v. James M. Sturtevant
    Baldwin, C. J., King, Murphy, Alcorn and MacDonald, Js.
    Argued October 5
    decided October 31, 1961
    
      Joseph E. Mouhawsher, with whom, on the brief, was Griswold Morgan, for the appellant (defendant).
    
      Donald O’Brien, for the appellee (plaintiff).
   Per Curiam.

This appeal is from the judgment rendered on a retrial of this case as the result of our reversal of an earlier judgment. See Sturtevant v. Sturtevant, 146 Conn. 644, 153 A.2d 828. The attempt in the present appeal is to reargue the intent of the parties as expressed in the separation agreement between them. That intent was a principal subject of our prior decision. The trial court correctly determined the defendant’s net income in accordance with our conclusion in that decision.

There is no error.