K. S. v. R. S.

Summary

The court held that Connecticut was required to give full faith and credit to final out-of-state orders forfeiting the marital home and imposing a constructive trust on investment accounts, because the issuing court had personal jurisdiction and no public-policy exception applied. Although the defendant's pledge and resulting forfeiture constituted dissipation, the assets themselves were no longer part of the marital estate and could not be equitably distributed. The court upheld the earning-capacity, relocation, and fraudulent-transfer rulings, but reversed the child-support calculation and pendente lite contempt ruling, requiring a new hearing on all intertwined financial orders.