The Connecticut Appellate Court has reversed a trial court's child support ruling in the divorce case of Jonathan I. Villao and Grisell V. Paz. The decision, officially released on September 8, 2026, is significant as it impacts the financial obligations of both parties following their marriage dissolution. The court found that the trial court abused its discretion in determining the child support amount, which could lead to a complete reevaluation of financial orders in the case.
The case began when Villao filed for divorce in January 2024. The couple, who married in August 2018, has two minor children together. The trial court's initial ruling included various financial orders, such as child support, alimony, and property distribution. However, Paz challenged the court's decisions, particularly regarding the child support calculations.
During the trial, the court heard evidence about the couple's financial situations. Villao had been working in an automotive parts store for twenty years but lost his job during the divorce proceedings. He was then working as a driver for Uber and DoorDash. Paz, a chiropractor, had to stop working due to a cancer diagnosis and ongoing treatment. The couple's financial circumstances were complicated by issues related to their assets and income.
The trial court ruled that Paz would pay Villao $119 per week in child support, which was based on a worksheet submitted by the defendant's counsel. However, the Appellate Court found that the trial court did not properly calculate the presumptive child support amount according to Connecticut guidelines. The court stated, "the court’s finding as to the presumptive child support award was not supported by the record," indicating that the trial court's decision was not based on accurate financial information.
The judges involved in this decision were Suarez, Seeley, and Westbrook. They emphasized that the trial court's reliance on the child support worksheet was erroneous, as it did not reflect the plaintiff's income at the time of the ruling. The court noted that the worksheet was filed at the beginning of the trial, and the plaintiff's employment status had changed since then.
In light of these findings, the Appellate Court reversed the trial court's financial orders and mandated a new trial to reconsider all financial aspects of the case. The court stated, "the entirety of the mosaic must be refashioned," indicating that all financial orders, including alimony and property distribution, would need to be reevaluated in light of the corrected child support calculations.
This ruling is important as it sets a precedent for how child support calculations should be approached in divorce cases. It highlights the necessity for courts to ensure that their financial orders are based on accurate and current financial information. The decision may affect not only Villao and Paz but also other families navigating similar legal challenges.
Looking ahead, the case will return to the trial court for a new examination of all financial orders. This means that the previous determinations regarding alimony, property division, and attorney's fees will also be reconsidered in the new trial. The court's ruling leaves open the possibility for both parties to present updated financial information and evidence that could influence the outcome of their financial obligations.
Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether either party plans to appeal further or if there are any related cases pending. However, this ruling underscores the complexities involved in divorce proceedings, particularly when significant financial issues are at stake.