Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Tuckman v. Tuckman

Supreme Court of Connecticut
61 A.3d 449 (Conn. 2013)


Facts

Craig Tuckman (plaintiff) filed a petition for divorce from Karen Tuckman (defendant) after being married approximately 16 years and having two children. Both Tuckmans had substantial income and assets. Craig was a commodities broker who earned a salary of $1,250,000 annually. Karen’s assets included a one-third stake in BJK Partners (BJK), an investment partnership with her two older brothers in which she earned about $2,000,000 annually, and a one-third ownership interest in Offices Limited, Inc. (Offices Limited), a family office-furniture business. BJK had a value of approximately $2,700,000, while Offices Limited was worth about $1,250,000. The trial court ordered Craig to pay $250 per child per week in child support. Karen filed a motion for articulation, asking whether the court had: (1) considered either party’s child-support calculation worksheet and (2) determined the net income of each party. The trial court did not specifically address Karen’s requests in its response. Karen appealed. The appellate court reversed and held that the trial court had failed to follow the state’s child-support guidelines and corresponding tables in fashioning a child-support amount. The Supreme Court of Connecticut granted certiorari to review.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Eveleigh, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.