## Facts

- A wife and husband’s marriage was dissolved, and the trial court entered financial orders.
- The wife claimed the husband dissipated marital assets both before and after the parties’ separation.
- The wife offered a detailed dissipation report; the trial court initially admitted it but later struck portions addressing pre-separation spending and considered only a redacted, post-separation version.
- On appeal, the Appellate Court declined to reach the evidentiary claim, concluding the record was inadequate because the unredacted report was not marked for identification as a full exhibit.
- The Supreme Court granted review to address record adequacy and, in doing so, clarified the circumstances in which pre-separation dissipation may be considered in dissolution financial orders.

## Issues

1. Whether the appellate record was adequate to review the wife’s claim that the trial court improperly excluded evidence of pre-separation dissipation.
2. Whether, and under what conditions, a dissolution court may consider dissipation of marital assets occurring before the parties’ separation when crafting financial orders.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court held the Appellate Court erred in finding the record inadequate for review.
- The Court ruled that a dissolution court may consider pre-separation dissipation if the spending occurred in contemplation of divorce or separation, or while the marriage was seriously jeopardized or undergoing an irretrievable breakdown.
- The Court reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with these standards.

## Legal Principles

- An appellate record is adequate if the reviewing court can determine the substance of the excluded evidence and the basis for the trial court’s ruling from the file and transcripts, even if an exhibit was not formally marked.
- Dissipation of marital assets may include improper use of marital property for a spouse’s own benefit and for a purpose unrelated to the marriage during serious marital difficulty or impending dissolution.
- In dissolution financial orders, pre-separation dissipation is not categorically excluded; relevance turns on a sufficient temporal connection to the breakdown of the marriage (contemplation of divorce/separation or irretrievable breakdown).
- When dissipation is established under this standard, the court may account for the depleted assets in property distribution and related financial orders.

## Conclusion

The court required appellate review of the evidentiary ruling and held that pre-separation dissipation can affect dissolution financial orders when tied to an impending or actual marital breakdown, preventing strategic depletion of marital assets before formal separation.


Finan v. Finan, 287 Conn. 491, 949 A.2d 468 (Conn. 2008)