FA 06-4027147 SUPERIOR COURT SZYMONIK, STEPHANIE JD OF HARTFORD VS. AT HARTFORD SZYMONIK, PETER APRIL 11, 2014 27.10, 331, Before the court are three motions filed relative to an appeal, filed by the defendant, of the court's (Carbonneau, J.) post judgment decision dated October 11, 2013. All three motions relate to an award of attorney's fees to participate in the appeal. Both parties testified and submitted evidence to the court, including current financial affidavits. Considering all of the evidence, as well as C.GS. § §46b-62, 46b-82, and applicable case law, the court makes the following findings of fact and enters orders accordingly. ‘The defendant's February 17, 2013 "Statement of Issues” on appeal lists 10 issues. Eight of the ten issues on appeal address, broadly speaking, and the courts financial orders. Two of the issues on appeal implicate evidentiary rulings and orders relative to the children. The plaintiff's net weekly income is approximately $1,060 and the defendant’s net weekly income is approximately $1,472 per week. Although there was testimony that the defendant is in non-compliance, the court has ordered the defendant to pay to the plaintiff the sum of $200 per week in child support. With this exchange of child support, the difference in the parties’ respective income is negligible. Both parties weekly expenses exceed their weekly income. The plaintiff has $42,000 in liabilities and the defendant has $145, 500 in liabilities. Bothparties owe their current lawyers and the GAL thousands of dollars. The plaintiff has $78,000 in assets and the defendant has $20,351 in assets. The court granted the defendant time to reconsider pressing the appellate issues that implicate the children’s interest. After consideration, it was reported to the court that the two issues on appeal relative to the children’s interest would not be withdrawn. This was and is a decision that rests solely with the defendant, and although he has the right to appeal, the responsibility for the costs incurred for that portion of the appeal relative to the children cannot fairly be a burden placed upon the plaintiff. Considering all of the evidence and testimony the court enters the following orders: 1) Motion #327.10 is denied. 2) Motion #331.0 is sustained. 3) Motion #333.10 is granted. The court appoints, subject to his acceptance, Attorney Matthew Potter to respond to the appeal for the GAL to those issue that implicate the children’s interest. The defendant shall pay to Attorney Potter an initial retainer of $2,500 within 20 days of this order. Thereafter, the defendant shall pay any and all reasonable and customary fees and expenses incurred by Attorney Potter to defend those issues on appeal which implicate the children’s interest. SO ORDERED