(a) Sections
45a-557 to
45a-560b, inclusive, apply to a transfer that refers to said sections in the designation under subsection (a) of section
45a-558f by which the transfer is made if at the time of the transfer, the transferor, the minor or the custodian is a resident of this state or the custodial property is located in this state. Courts of probate in any district in which the transferor, the minor or the custodian is resident, or in which the custodial property is located shall have jurisdiction of any disputes or matters involving custodianship under sections
45a-557 to
45a-560b, inclusive. The custodianship so created remains subject to said sections and to such probate court jurisdiction despite a subsequent change in residence of a transferor, the minor or the custodian, or the removal of custodial property from this state.
(b) A person designated as custodian under sections 45a-557 to 45a-560b, inclusive, is subject to personal jurisdiction in this state with respect to any matter relating to the custodianship.
(c) A transfer that purports to be made and which is valid under the Uniform Transfers to Minors Act, the Uniform Gifts to Minors Act, or a substantially similar act, of another state is governed by the law of the state designated in the instrument of transfer and may be executed and is enforceable in this state if at the time of the transfer, the transferor, the minor or the custodian is a resident of the designated state or the custodial property is located in the designated state.
(P.A. 95-117, S. 3.)
Subsec. (a):
Superior Court found to have subject matter jurisdiction in case that involved custodial accounts and arose in the context of the dissolution of a marriage. 56 CA 492.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
3
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1999–2021 · leading case:
Sender v. Sender, 743 A.2d 1149 (Conn. App. Ct. 2000).
Sender v. Sender, 743 A.2d 1149 (Conn. App. Ct. 2000).
· cites it 9× “The crux of the defendant’s argument is that because the underlying issue dealt with his actions as custodian, pursuant to General Statutes § 45a-557b (a), the Probate Court was the only court with jurisdiction to hear the case.”
State v. Pompei, 726 A.2d 644 (Conn. App. Ct. 1999).
· cites it 2× “General Statutes § 45a-557b provides in relevant part: “Courts of probate in any district in which the trans-feror, the minor or the custodian is resident, or in which the custodial property is located shall have jurisdiction of any disputes or matters involving custodianship…”
In re Prob. Appeal of McIntyre, 263 A.3d 925 (Conn. App. Ct. 2021).
· cites it 4× “Pursuant to General Statutes § 45a-557b (a),5 the defendant filed a petition in the Probate Court, requesting that the funds that the plaintiff had removed from the account be restored, that the plaintiff be removed as custodian of the account, and that she be appointed as the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.