← LexyCorpus index

LexyCorpus case page

Dina L. Dufresne v. James P. Crosskey

March 16, 1999 · US

Extracted case name
Dina L. Dufresne v. James P. Crosskey
Extracted reporter citation
pending
Docket / number
pending
QDRO relevance 5/5Retirement relevance 2/5Family-law relevance 5/5gold label pending
Research-use warning: This page contains machine-draft public annotations generated from public opinion text. The headnote is not Willie-approved gold-label work product and is not legal advice. Verify the full opinion and current law before relying on it.

Machine-draft headnote

Machine-draft public headnote: Dina L. Dufresne v. James P. Crosskey is included in the LexyCorpus QDRO sample set as a public CourtListener opinion with relevance to QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues. The current annotation is conservative: it identifies source provenance, relevance signals, and evidence quotes for attorney/agent retrieval. It is not a Willie-approved legal headnote yet.

Retrieval annotation

Draft retrieval summary: this opinion has QDRO relevance score 5/5, retirement-division score 2/5, and family-law score 5/5. Use the quoted text and full opinion below before relying on the case.

Category: QDRO procedure / domestic relations order issues

Evidence quotes

QDRO

e which shall occur within 120 days of judgment. The defendant shall make every effort to remove plaintiff from obligation on the note and present mortgage securing said obligation. The Court shall retain jurisdiction on the execution and maintenance of any QDRO. ARTICULATION Pursuant to the motion for articulation filed by defendant on January 29, 1999, it was the Court's intention that the $6000 payment ordered in its judgment at page 5, subsection (C) is additional periodic alimony. It was also the Court's intention at page 5, subsection (D) that the plaintiff shall be entitled to 25 percent of the net amou

Source and provenance

Source type
courtlistener_qdro_opinion_full_text
Permissions posture
public
Generated status
machine draft public v0
Review status
gold label pending
Jurisdiction metadata
US
Deterministic extraction
pending
Generated at
May 14, 2026
View public source on courtlistener.com

Related public corpus pages

Deterministic links based on shared title/citation terms and QDRO / retirement / family-law retrieval scores.

Clean opinion text

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] ARTICULATION 
Pursuant to the motion to reargue post judgment, and treating same as a motion for articulation, the Court orders the following. 
 The payment of child support shall be made until each child attains the minimum age of eighteen. Medical insurance shall be paid through the eighteenth birthday of each minor child. 
 The parties shall be required to exchange W-2 forms annually upon receint of same in order to calculate the bonus. 
 The defendant shall pay to plaintiff the sum of $70,000 at the time of conveyance of the marital home which shall occur within 120 days of judgment. The defendant shall make every effort to remove plaintiff from obligation on the note and present mortgage securing said obligation. 
 The Court shall retain jurisdiction on the execution and maintenance of any QDRO. 
 ARTICULATION 
Pursuant to the motion for articulation filed by defendant on January 29, 1999, it was the Court's intention that the $6000 payment ordered in its judgment at page 5, subsection (C) is additional periodic alimony. 
 It was also the Court's intention at page 5, subsection (D) that the plaintiff shall be entitled to 25 percent of the net amount received. If the stock options have no value or negative value at the time of vesting, the defendant shall not be required to exercise same until they have net value. If the stock options have a net value, then plaintiff shall notify defendant to exercise 25 percent of said options. The Court shall retain jurisdiction of the issue of exercising the stock options if there is a dispute among the parties. 
 Owens, J. CT Page 3854