You are on page 1of 32

1 1NO: FA09-4037658 : SUPERIOR COURT 2 3SUNNY LIBERTI : JUDICIAL 4DISTRICT 5 OF MIDDLESEX 6 7v.

: AT MIDDLETOWN, CONNECTICUT 8 9ROBERT LIBERTI : FEBRUARY 22, 2011 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 BEFORE THE HONORABLE LYNDA B. MUNRO, JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23A P P E A R A N C E S : 24 25 26 27 Representing the Plaintiff: 28 29 ATTORNEY JAMES M. SMITH 30 ATTORNEY KRISTINA BORDIERI 31 1331 Main Street 32 Springfield, MA 01103 33 34 35 Representing the Defendant: 36 37 ATTORNEY NOAH EISENHANDLER, ESQ. 38 1164 Townsend Avenue 39 New Haven, CT 60512 40 41 42 Guardian Ad Litem: 43 44 ATTORNEY MAUREEN MURPHY 45 234 Church Street 46 New Haven, CT 06510 47 48 49 50 51 Recorded and Transcribed by: 52 53 Nancy Gill-Rea 54 Court Recording Monitor 2

1
2

2
One Court Street Middletown, CT 06457

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1
2

1 THE COURT: Court Reporter, were on the record

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

briefly on a case, docket number FA09-4037658, its a regional case out of New Haven, Sunny Liberti, L-i-b-e-r-t-i vs. Robert Liberti. Counsel, state your names for the record, please and who you are in the case. ATTY. BORDIERI: Kristina Bordieri, here on

behalf of the plaintiff. ATTY. SMITH: James M. Smith of Springfield, Im

pro hac vice before the Court on behalf of the plaintiff. THE COURT: right? ATTY. BORDIERI: THE COURT: Im licensed. And youre licensed in Connecticut,

Youre the sponsoring attorney? I am.

ATTY. BORDIERI: ATTY. SMITH: Im -THE COURT:

Shes the sponsoring attorney and

Okay, I just want to make sure I

knew who was who, thank you. ATTY. EISENHANDLER: Attorney Noah Eisenhandler

representing Robert Liberti whos present, Your Honor. ATTY. MURPHY: Your Honor, Maureen Murphy,

Guardian Ad Litem for Max Liberti. THE COURT: any responses. All right. Im not going to ask for

You all -- counsel were entirely

1
2

2 appropriate to notify each other obviously that this was pending and are here with the parties. What I have in front of me is something entitled, Emergency Motion For Immediate Suspension of Plaintiffs Supervised Visitation, with an attached affidavit in plaintiffs opposition to defendants application to suspend plaintiffs contact with the minor child. Its not my goal in life to try form over substance. But it appears, Mr. Eisenhandler, that This is

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

your motion was not intended to be ex parte. a question, because you notified counsel? ATTY. EISENHANDLER:

I would have notified No, I contacted

counsel no matter what, Your Honor.

counsel after this incident occurred, and indicated I was going to be filing an emergency motion, and I was going to present it to the Court this morning and give them an opportunity to respond and to show up. It wasnt intended to be an ex parte order. Though I expect the Court would have taken it on the papers if the Court was so inclined. THE COURT: Well actually, not in accordance

with the law once you didnt make it ex parte, I cant. ATTY. EISENHANDLER: THE COURT: Thats fine.

Because the Practice Book says all

custodial -- no, all matters in family Court are

1
2

3 arguable, although were working on changing that on discovery at least. There are a couple of practice realities. Im

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

about to start a trial that is every bit as troubling as yours that I was in the middle of before God granted me a vacation, and the trial starts in about one minute. And I dont have time for a full hearing. thats problematic. So

And Judge Gordon is away, and

Judge Calmar is away, who is our go-to third Judge here. And the other Judge with familiarity of family

matters is covering Judge Calmars docket right now upstairs. So we have a problem here. So I at least wanted

to come out and explain to you that we have a problem. I do want to ask a couple of questions that were not covered in the motion and the affidavit so that I can help myself decide what I want to do. Who is the supervisor? ATTY. EISENHANDLER: Nick Sarno, Your Honor,

Nick Sarnos company, he has a couple people that work for him when he supervises parenting time. THE COURT: is. ATTY. MURPHY: I do believe, Your Honor, that Yes, I know who Mr. Sarnos company

Mr. Sarno is under subpoena and is going to be here

1
2

4 at ten oclock. THE COURT: And was the supervisor charged with

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

any specific responsibilities or limitations in the supervisors duties other than supervise? ATTY. SMITH: effect. ATTY. EISENHANDLER: THE COURT: Okay. I would agree, Your Honor. And the order of Judge Gordon No, theres no order to that

granting sole custody to the defendant until the hearing, did it have any further language in regard to it other than describing the plaintiffs access? In other words, did it say, the plaintiff may do this, the defendant may do this, the defendant may not do that? ATTY. SMITH: THE COURT: Not to my knowledge. So it was sole custody? The order of November 9th But my

ATTY. EISENHANDLER:

said sole custody, supervised visitation.

recollection was that the transcript indicated that this childs been put through quite a bit of -THE COURT: No, no, I didnt ask you to argue.

Were working real hard on this, okay, Mr. Eisenhandler? ATTY. EISENHANDLER: orders the order. The order, Your Honor, the

The order says supervised

visitation, sole custody to my client with some scheduling time, things like that.

1
2

5 THE COURT: All right. And not to speak about

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

ATTY. EISENHANDLER: custody and litigation. THE COURT:

All right.

Now, Attorney Murphy,

youre the GAL, is that right? ATTY. MURPHY: THE COURT: Yes, Your Honor. And your ward is how old?

Okay.

ATTY. MURPHY: Honor. THE COURT:

He is seven years old, Your

I see that.

If I were to have a

hearing, is it a matter for which you would want to be heard? ATTY. MURPHY: Yes, Your Honor. And I have

additional concerns that have been conveyed to me by the childs individual therapist, Dr. John Collins. THE COURT: Dr. Collins is the therapist. Hes the childs therapist.

ATTY. MURPHY: THE COURT:

Who is the evaluator? The evaluator was Dr. Adamakos,

ATTY. MURPHY: Your Honor. out of state.

I have a letter from Dr. Collins who is I have been in -This is vacation week in Connecticut

THE COURT: apparently.

ATTY. MURPHY:

Yes it is.

And he has -- I have

been in significant conversations with Dr. Collins over the weekend. I was actually on vacation when

this incident occurred, but I nonetheless spoke to

1
2

6 Dr. Collins at that time, and Nick Sarno. THE COURT: Okay. I have a letter from Dr. Collins

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

ATTY. MURPHY:

that both counsel have agreed that the Court may review. And the -- and Dr. Collins is making some

recommendations, Your Honor. THE COURT: Is the agreement that I may review

it regardless of whether I hold a hearing? ATTY. EISENHANDLER: ATTY. SMITH: THE COURT: Yes.

Yes, Judge. All right, pass it up. Thank you.

Before I read it, is there -- well mark it in a second, is there a question of privilege that I should be looking at before I read this? ATTY. EISENHANDLER: ATTY. SMITH: ATTY. MURPHY: No, Your Honor.

No, Judge. Your Honor, it had originally

been my intention to assert the privilege because I felt that Dr. Collins relationship with this child was absolutely essential that it be preserved. But in light of the events that have occurred, I no longer feel that it is in the best interest of the child that I assert that privilege. THE COURT: All right. Im not as fast a reader

as you might think, so take a seat and settle in. Mr. Mickelson, feel free to stay with us. If

they ask you, tell them Im about five more minutes.

1
2

7 Thank you. They look like they want to know, thats

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

why Im saying it, thank you. (The Court referring to the next case coming into Court.) (Court takes time to review letter.) Mr. Sarno. MR. SARNO: THE COURT: MR. SARNO: Your Honor. THE COURT: MR. SARNO: THE COURT: No, thats okay, thats all right. Thank you, Maam. Do the parties take a position on Yes, Maam. Your timing is perfect. Im sorry, we hit traffic coming up,

Dr. Collins wish for an evaluation by Dr. Robson? ATTY. EISENHANDLER: Were somewhat concerned

about the potential delay of three months, Your Honor. THE COURT: Of what? You dropped your voice at

the end, Im sorry. ATTY. EISENHANDLER: Of -- Im sorry. Were

somewhat concerned that mothers (indecipherable word) will take approximately twelve weeks for this full evaluation to be done. However, theres

potential for a records review which would, I understand, would be within a week and wed certainly have no objection to that. THE COURT: So its something between one and

twelve weeks is okay with you, but not twelve weeks?

1
2

8 ATTY. EISENHANDLER: Well, were not -- were It was my

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

opposed to continuing the trial.

understanding that Dr. Robson can do a record review within the week and have a report back -THE COURT: Okay, so its because youre opposed

to continuing the trial -ATTY. EISENHANDLER: THE COURT: understand. ATTY. EISENHANDLER: Honor. THE COURT: I understand that. The Guardian? On general principle, Your Were --

-- not on general principle, I

ATTY. MURPHY:

Yes, Your Honor, I just wanted to

give some additional information about my conversation with Dr. Robson. Which I communicated

with him over the weekend, and had a rather lengthy discussion with him yesterday. He has indicated to me that he would be able to do a record review and be available to testify on the morning of the 3rd. He might have some availability

on the 2nd, Your Honor, which I believe is the first day of the scheduled trial. I told him that I would be able to get him -THE COURT: Hes out of town on the 4th, right? Im sorry?

ATTY. MURPHY: THE COURT:

I needed him for something else on I remember that from

the 4th and he couldnt do it.

1
2

9 before my vacation. ATTY. MURPHY: Hes leaving for vacation. Yeah,

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

hes leaving for vacation the 4th through the 11th, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. So -- but he did say to me that

ATTY. MURPHY:

if I got him all the records, which I could do -- I could actually have everything scanned and emailed to him today if the Court allowed, that he could do a record review and be available to testify on the morning of the 3rd. I believe that was the date, Your

Honor, but I could check for certain and make sure. I could make a phone call to make sure about that. THE COURT: And if he did a full psychiatric

evaluation of the parties and -ATTY. MURPHY: He indicated to me he would need

twelve weeks, Your Honor. THE COURT: comes from? ATTY. MURPHY: Yes. I had indicated both of So thats where the twelve weeks

those facts to counsel when I -- I received this letter from Dr. Collins after much back and forth. Even though hes on vacation, at the risk of destroying his vacation, he sent this to me at 8:26 this morning, Your Honor. THE COURT: Thats fine. So, I just wanted to indicate --

ATTY. MURPHY:

1
2

10 THE COURT: Thats all right. -- that I have not had this in my

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

ATTY. MURPHY: hands. THE COURT:

All right.

At least no one

destroyed my vacation.

I have my priorities.

Counsel, whats your position? ATTY. SMITH: Judge, Im very concerned about The record is parsimonious in

only a record review.

this case and incomplete with respect to the questions that are being asked by this doctor. And thats one of the problems in this case. So my concern is that my client has supervised visits to begin with, and thats troubling. And she

would -- and we dont think thats an inappropriate thing to have done, and we think its problematic to the child. But nevertheless -THE COURT: ATTY. SMITH: But it is what it is. -- it is what it is. And on the

other hand, this child is having some problems that are reflected in this report. THE COURT: So your client is agreeable to Dr.

Robson as a full evaluator? ATTY. SMITH: If the Court orders it and -- she That would be the

would only want a full evaluation.

only thing that would make sense in this case. THE COURT: All right. Mr. Eisenhandler, you

1
2

11 know, Im not a psychiatrist or a psychologist, but the more you do this work you do understand what some of the terms are that are being thrown around. ATTY. EISENHANDLER: THE COURT: All right.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

And my understanding of a shared

delusional disorder, folie a deux, I believe its called, Ive learned that, and munchhausen, are that you could not rule out or rule in those kinds of questions on a record review if youre a psychiatrist. I suspect he would need to interview as to the defendant -- the plaintiff, her and the child on those claims, on the claims of your client having a personality disorder, that could only be dealt with by interview. I cant imagine any of those flags that hes raised as to your client, the plaintiff or the child being dealt with on a record review. imagine it. And knowing what the recommended course is, the more troubling rule-outs. I cant imagine how a I just cant

judge could make those decisions. Lets just say that one of those rule-outs becomes what Dr. Robson says and the Court accepts it, I just want to go down the path with you from your clients perspective. I believe a grossly different order would come

1
2

12 out than if those were not in place. And so we would

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

not be serving this little boy very well if indeed these are real concerns. And we all are aware, at

least those of us in Connecticut, that Dr. Collins is a credible psychologist. I cant believe he would have written the letter he wrote unless he had the concerns he was raising in a legitimate way, at least as to rule-outs. Thats my concern with not giving the continuance. I understand the pressure this places

on a child who is in an extraordinary dilemma and your client wanting it over. But I dont know what

else to do after having read that. ATTY. EISENHANDLER: The Courts certainly

empowered at the end of the trial after It makes Its findings and decision to enter any appropriate orders that could address further therapy, further therapeutic visitation. THE COURT: Let me give you a for instance.

Ill tell you how educated I am. One recommendation on a shared delusional disorder would be, I am sure, for the adult who has the delusion to be separated from the child for a period of time, totally, totally separated for a long period of time, which at age seven is pretty significant. It is a very, very difficult age to

risk something like that.

1
2

13 And thats a lot different than even saying, we should have some supervision. Its just grossly

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

different in terms of the psychological well-being of the child because the attachment gets completely disrupted by design. What you may not be aware of -ATTY. EISENHANDLER: Courts saying. THE COURT: -- so Im just sort of giving you I appreciate what the

the picture that is playing in the back of my mind -ATTY. EISENHANDLER: I appreciate -- I

appreciate that, and the claim for relief which has already been previously filed, so this isnt a revelation, but our claim for relief is that there be therapeutic visitation -THE COURT: Wont do the bill. I would be told

by at least one mental health professional, theyll be disagreements if we go down that road, but at least one mental health professional would tell the Judge pure separation, no contact for an extensive period of time, and then other things to follow. ATTY. EISENHANDLER: But theres no one whos Theres no one

gonna testify to that in this trial.

in this trial whos gonna say mother should have no contact with the child. THE COURT: Right. But the childs therapist is

saying if that is a rule-out, we need to know,

1
2

14 because otherwise, we have done the child a disservice, if its true. -- if thats the diagnosis. But Im being told this is a potential diagnosis. And if it is, then your claims for relief I dont know if its there

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

could harm the child is what Im saying to you. ATTY. EISENHANDLER: THE COURT: I understand, Your Honor.

Its -- the playing field has But

changed potentially, and it may not have at all. the childs own treater is concerned. ATTY. EISENHANDLER: THE COURT:

I understand, Your Honor.

And I feel like I would be doing a

tremendous disservice to this child to ignore and on both sides of the equation, but Im using that because its the most explicative to your client, I assume. ATTY. EISENHANDLER: We still have some

concerns, Your Honor, over last weeks action. THE COURT: Right. So Im going to do something

entirely unorthodox and you all can take exception. Mr. Sarno? MR. SARNO: THE COURT: Yes, Maam. Would you mind finding your way to a

microphone, and is the woman with you the evaluator from last week? MR. SARNO: THE COURT: Shes the supervisor. Supervisor, sorry about that, wrong

1
2

15 word. MR. SARNO: THE COURT: Yes, Your Honor. Would the two of you join the

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

Guardian at her microphone? MR. SARNO: THE COURT: Yes, Maam. Im taking longer than I thought, Maybe theyll settle. Not

Mr. Mickelson, Im sorry. so much, right?

Could you just state your names and business address, if you would please? MR. SARNO: Nicholas J. Sarno, 4 Daniels Farm

Road, Trumbull, Connecticut 06611. THE COURT: MS. CHIODO: Maam? And Im Allison C. Chiodo at 4

Daniels Farm Road, Trumbull, Connecticut 06611. THE COURT: Okay. Youre here to help me, not

to have any concerns raised as to your work. Mr. Sarno, you may not recall me, we all look the same in a black robe, but you were in Stamford when I was. MR. SARNO: Honor. THE COURT: Thats the right answer. Anyway, I recall you very clearly, Your

Im going to put limits on the nature of the plaintiffs supervised visitation, and which means its going to impose responsibilities on the supervisor. And I want to go over them with you on

1
2

16 the record to make sure its something that your office is and supervisors are capable of and comfortable with doing. MR. SARNO: THE COURT: Fair enough?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

Yes, Your Honor. Okay. Right now as I understand it,

Mr. Sarno, when Ms. Kelly has contact with her child, youre simply there to observe, is that right? MR. SARNO: THE COURT: Correct. Do you understand yourself to any

prophylactic responsibilities as not leave the State of Connecticut or anything like that presently? MR. SARNO: THE COURT: Correct, Your Honor. Anything beyond, dont take the

child out of Connecticut? MR. SARNO: It was -- we do three things mainly,

Your Honor, we observe, we report, we protect. THE COURT: MR. SARNO: Okay. The only thing that we were under

the direction from the Guardian Ad Litem was that the child could not leave the State. THE COURT: MR. SARNO: Okay. And that a written report was

submitted per visitation on a weekly basis. THE COURT: All right. Does Ms. Kelly enjoy her

visitation at any particular locations normally? MR. SARNO: supervisor. Ill leave that up to the on-site

1
2

17 MS. CHIODO: Normally, at her home in Bethany.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3 part.

You know, sometimes they will go to different stores, but mostly at the home. THE COURT: MS. CHIODO: All right. What about restaurants?

Different restaurants for the most

For the most part, food at home. THE COURT: Okay. The home in Bethany,

restaurants, shopping? MS. CHIODO: THE COURT: MS. CHIODO: stores. THE COURT: when they travel? MS. CHIODO: THE COURT: MS. CHIODO: Yes, I do. Who drives? It depends, sometimes Ms. Kelly And do you go in the car with them Yes, shopping, Target, Walmart -Is that a good way to put it? -- those kinds of places, toy

drives, sometimes her mother Diane drives, sometimes Ada Shaw drives. mother, Diane. THE COURT: Mr. Sarno, would it violate the For the most part, it is her

regulations of your supervisor business to have the supervisor drive? MR. SARNO: THE COURT: MR. SARNO: not at all. Not at all, Your Honor. Okay. We would have to bill for that, but

1
2

18 THE COURT: Okay. Does the supervisor observe

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

-- or listen to conversations? MR. SARNO: THE COURT: Correct, Your Honor. And are they recorded in summary

fashion in notes afterwards? MR. SARNO: Yes, and she has her notes with her.

And then a written report is sent from those notes. THE COURT: MR. SARNO: THE COURT: MR. SARNO: Honor. THE COURT: MR. SARNO: THE COURT: Maybe you do remember me. Yes, I do, Your Honor. If I were to empower the supervisor Im thinking. Yes, Your Honor. You could see the smoke, right? I know not to interrupt you, Your

only to determine whether a medical emergency existed, is that something your office is comfortable with? MR. SARNO: Yes. But our procedure is that the

supervisor notifies me, Ill talk to the supervisor in detail, Ill talk to the parent, Ill make an assessment. I did that once where we sent the child to the emergency room because of abdominal pains. concerned about appendicitis. I was

I instructed my

supervisor to take the child to the emergency room. I also called the father of the child, informed

1
2

19 him what was taking place. I directed him to go up

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

to the emergency room because I felt that he has a right. Also, hes the temporary custodial parent and

-- so were used to doing that, and thats our procedure. THE COURT: Okay. As the person whos been

supervising, is there any reason in the normal course of Maxs enjoyment of his time with his mother that she should be able to take the child anywhere other than her home in Bethany, restaurants, shopping or what I would call amusements of the nature of like bowling or -- you understand what I mean by amusements? MS. CHIODO: Yes. A birthday party would come

under amusements, right? THE COURT: party? MS. CHIODO: THE COURT: MS. CHIODO: everything. THE COURT: Okay. Im making notes to myself. Something like that. Okay. I think that that covers almost We will call -- a childs birthday

Mr. Sarno, Im going to walk a very fine road here, because I dont want to give the parties an opportunity to cross-examine you because I dont have the time. MR. SARNO: Yes, Maam.

1
2

20 THE COURT: So is there anything that has been

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

reported to you by your supervisor or supervisors, if theres been more than one, that would cause you, as a the experienced owner of your business, to recommend anything beyond the following as limits on the supervision, okay? Im going to read them to you

and then you answer me, okay? MR. SARNO: THE COURT: Yes, Maam. Not only not leave the State;

supervisor drives; child may be taken to moms home in Bethany; restaurants; shopping; amusements; child birthday parties only; only the supervisor determines if there is a medical emergency and what conduct should follow from there; and the mother shall engage in no conversation with the child regarding any claimed assaultive behavior of the father. MR. SARNO: Correct, Your Honor. The one thing

Id like to see, if possible, Id like to have on some of the visitations, I understand the family members, the grandmother, et cetera, Im not adverse to them taking part. But I would also like to see

the mother, the child and the supervisor only at some visitations. THE COURT: MR. SARNO: THE COURT: Okay. And that could be divided 50/50. Yes. Am I going to hear any

strident objection to that?

1
2

21 ATTY. SMITH: THE COURT: No. Okay. I think thats Ms. Kellys

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

ATTY. EISENHANDLER: choice, but -THE COURT:

The answer was no. The answers no, but I do

ATTY. EISENHANDLER:

have one objection to one of the Courts recommendations. THE COURT: What? The driving. I prefer the

ATTY. EISENHANDLER:

supervisor be able to dedicate all her time to listening to whats going on between the mother and not be distracted by driving. THE COURT: I know how to deal with that, okay? Your Honor, if I could add one

ATTY. MURPHY: recommendation -THE COURT:

Yes. -- that Dr. Collins and I

ATTY. MURPHY:

discussed about the supervision, and I have discussed it with Mr. Sarno. The child is engaging in certain behaviors that are -THE COURT: I read that. He wanted me to -- Im

sorry to cut you off. ATTY. MURPHY: THE COURT: Thats okay.

He wants me to order that the

mothers visits cut short if the child hits

1
2

22 themselves -ATTY. MURPHY: Or her or another person, because

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

he is engaging in hitting his mother and other people during his visits. THE COURT: And Im concerned about it. He may

well be engaging it in his dads home too. -ATTY. MURPHY:

I think

Your Honor, we have had some

supervised visits at dads -THE COURT: Yes. -- to give a view of that just to And the -- we

ATTY. MURPHY:

see the difference in his behaviors.

had, I believe there was one last week that I have not seen the notes for. There have been three all

together to observe the childs behavior at dads house. And one other thing, Your Honor, just before I leave that, is that Dr. Collins is willing to do some therapeutic visits on a weekly basis. THE COURT: be the rules. Okay. All right, these are going to

And the Court is modifying the order

of supervised visitation to be the following: Said supervision shall be as follows: Ms. Kellys visitation time with Max shall be subject to the following: The supervisor shall drive the car and the child shall not be on the same seat as the mother. So the

1
2

23 mother is either in the front and the child in the back, or the child in the front and the mother in the back. The visits may take place at her home in Bethany, at restaurants, shopping, at amusements and childrens birthday parties. The mother has no authority to exercise decision making in the event of an emergency. In the event of

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

a medical emergency, the supervisor shall determine, number one, whether theres a medical emergency, and number two, what is the proper course of conduct and as soon as feasible, notify both the father and then the Guardian Ad Litem of the same. last, least important, no offense. There shall be no conversation by the mother with the child regarding any claimed assaultive behavior of the father. If the child hits either himself or another person, the mother shall say the following to the child, no hitting, it is not good for you. If its Guardian comes

to another person, no hitting, that is not right to do to another person. If the supervisor determines as a result of the hitting that the child needs a time out, the supervisor may impose it. The Court will also authorize therapeutic visitation with Dr. Collins, to the extent he is

1
2

24 willing to do so, and the supervisor is willing to do any transporting necessary. I dont know how the

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

timing would work, so Id leave it that way. Mr. Sarno, also you had asked and so the Court will also order as part of the visitation, that Ms. Kellys time with her child shall be exclusive with her for no less than half of her time with the child, and it can be alternating visits or half of each visit. Yes? ATTY. SMITH: Yes, excuse me, Judge. I think

its a good idea to have the therapeutic counseling, but I would suggest that it not interfere with the current ordered supervision time. THE COURT: Its not in lieu of. I should have

said its not in lieu of, its in addition to, if Dr. Collins so desires. treating the child. ATTY. SMITH: Thats fine, Judge. So shes getting -- so any I leave it to him because hes

ATTY. EISENHANDLER: therapeutic -THE COURT:

I dont know if shes getting more

time, its not her, thats your clients perception. Its whether the child should be seen by the mother -- by his own therapist with the mother. What Dr. Collins clearly wants to do is observe the relationship, Mr. Eisenhandler, got it?

1
2

25 ATTY. EISENHANDLER: THE COURT: ATTY. SMITH: THE COURT: modified. Now, the next problem is Dr. Robson, hes not a problem, I dont mean to put it that way. I dont know whos going to pay for it. who has the money to pay for it. to do a financial hearing on that. I intend to order it, and I dont even have affidavits here. So what Im going to do is start I dont Okay? Yes, Your Honor. All right, the orders are so I understand.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

I dont have time

the trial Im going to start unless you all can come up with -- and give you guys five minutes to come up with a without prejudice order to have it sort of reapportioned at hearing. ATTY. EISENHANDLER: it, Your Honor. I think we could resolve

Theres money being held in escrow

and I certainly have no objection using those funds for Dr. Robson. ATTY. SMITH: THE COURT: We would concur. Okay. One other question, Your

ATTY. EISENHANDLER:

Honor, one other concern I have, and I think its going to be perfectly clear that Ms. Kelly cannot have Dr. Newberger meet with this child at her house. This was an issue that Judge Gordon --

1
2

26 THE COURT: an issue. ATTY. EISENHANDLER: THE COURT: the mother. That was an issue. I didnt realize that that was even

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

No medical access whatsoever through

No access to anyone other than children

at parties or amusements; family, within the limits as provided; Ms. Kelly and non-medical mental health family friends that would normally in due course be there. ATTY. EISENHANDLER: ATTY. SMITH: Thank you, Your Honor.

Just for the record, we were

before Judge Gordon the other day requesting an evaluation with the child because we understood that mother could not do that. So mother -- and Dr.

Newberger will not, nor without Courts permission meet. And Im a little bit concerned that that was

just raised. THE COURT: All right, so weve done our tit for

tat on that and were good. ATTY. SMITH: THE COURT: We did. Thank you.

Okay, I get it, all right. My turn. Okay, thank you.

ATTY. EISENHANDLER: THE COURT:

No, youre done.

The trial is continued. the dates.

Ms. Franchi will pick

What I would really like -- yes, shes

our caseflow person, so youre going to stay and meet with her.

1
2

27 The evaluation is ordered with Dr. Robson. There is no limit on his ability, in other words, Im not giving him specific questions, as he deems necessary. And the parties are to make themselves and the child available as Dr. Robson determines. Youre not

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

to seek continuances of any of the dates he gives you, you have to be there when he says he wants you. Otherwise, we wont get it done on the timeline he is providing, Im quite sure of that. And counsel are not to contact Dr. Robson. he wants to talk to you, hell call you. hasnt passed yet. Yes? ATTY. SMITH: Just one question. My client is If

That rule

in therapy with Ms. McGuire, and I think it would be -- we would waive the privilege for Dr. Robson to communicate with her therapist as we think that would be an important piece in this to render a conclusion. THE COURT: record. All right. Thats noted on the

Dr. Robson can communicate, as he deems

necessary, with other providers. And Attorney Murphy as the Guardian Ad Litem is charged with the responsibility of communicating all this to Dr. Robson and how the parties should immediately contact him, okay? ATTY. MURPHY: Your Honor, just one other thing

1
2

28 if it could be part of the orders. In the event that Dr. Robson determines that a particular type of evaluation should be done and he wants to -THE COURT: Like a neuropsych or a

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 3

psychologically -- he may confer with such other evaluators as are necessary. Counsel, hes a psychiatrist, sometimes they send people to a psychologist for certain kinds of testing, or a neuropsychologist for certain kind. Okay? Thank you. I understand, Your Honor. Thank you.

ATTY. SMITH: ATTY. MURPHY: THE COURT:

So ordered. Thank you, Your Honor.

ATTY. EISENHANDLER: THE COURT:

And the money comes without

prejudice out of the escrow. ATTY. SMITH: THE COURT: Thank you very much, Judge. Thank you. Thank you.

ATTY. MURPHY: MR. SARNO: THE COURT: finding your way.

Thank you, Your Honor. All right, thank you, Mr. Sarno, for Good luck to you, all right? Thank you, Your Honor. Okay, Dean and Valinho.

ATTY. EISENHANDLER: THE COURT:

Thank you.

Im entering an order on that last case quickly. Im sealing Dr. Collins letter under our statutory

1
2

29 provisions regarding a childs treating therapist. Thank you. ATTY. SMITH: THE COURT: ATTY. SMITH: THE COURT: the Court. Thank you. Would you tell Mr. Eisenhandler? I will, Judge. Thank you, until further order of

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8(End of hearing.) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

1 1NO: FA09-4037658 2 3SUNNY LIBERTI 4DISTRICT 5 6 7v. 8 9ROBERT LIBERTI 10 11 12 13 14 15

SUPERIOR COURT : JUDICIAL

OF MIDDLESEX : : AT MIDDLETOWN, CONNECTICUT FEBRUARY 22, 2011

C E R T I F I C A T I O N

I hereby certify the foregoing 29 pages are a true and

16correct transcription of the audio recording of the above17referenced case, heard in Superior Court, Judicial District of 18Middlesex, Middletown, Connecticut, before the Honorable Lynda 19B. Munro, Judge, on this 22nd day of February, 2011. 20 21 22
Dated this 23rd day of February, 2011 in Middletown,

23Connecticut. 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

_____________________________ Nancy Gill-Rea Court Recording Monitor