Sachs v. Sachs
In Sachs v. Sachs, 60 Conn. App. 337, 759 A.2d 510 (2000), the defendant appealed from the court's order awarding the plaintiff one third of the defendant's future pension benefits on the grounds that the court misinterpreted the parties' settlement agreement and that the court was without subject matter jurisdiction because 46b-81 did not authorize the court to award future benefits. Id., 340-41.
The challenged order specifically gave the plaintiff "one third of all postdissolution deposits made to the defendant's retirement plans and the earnings thereon." Id., 338.
In Sachs, the Court held, pursuant to 46b-1 and 46b-81, that the court had jurisdiction over the plaintiff's claim. The Court explained that the question was not one of subject matter jurisdiction, but, rather, it was one of authority. Id., 345-46.