According to public court files, Louise Iacono filed for divorce against her husband, Ludovico, in Superior Court in Connecticut in 2010 (Case No. FST FA 10-401974S). The defendant was represented by Broder & Orland. In this highly contentious divorce, there was one minor child. The former married couple had a parenting plan filed in their divorce that discussed shared parenting time.
On October 4, 2011, Broder & Orland filed a motion to hold the plaintiff in contempt. It was alleged that Mrs. Iacono had violated the parenting plan and “intentionally” caused harm to the defendant’s relationship with the minor child (paragraph 6, Defendant’s Motion for Contempt Re: Parenting Plan, Pendente Lite).
The one and only claim listed is that Mrs. Iacono “refused to facilitate the Defendant’s parenting time…” Yet, there was no explanation of what she allegedly did that was so serious that it would cause serious harm.
Broder & Orland also asked the court to order Mrs. Iacono to pay the costs of the motion and reasonable attorney fees (on top of an order to the plaintiff to enforce the parenting time).
