Callahan

The plaintiff, whose marriage to the defendant previously had been dis- solved, appealed to this court from the judgment of the trial court resolving certain postjudgment motions that the parties had filed. The plaintiff claimed, inter alia, that the trial court improperly granted the defendant's motion to modify his alimony obligation and ordered that the modification apply retroactively. The dissolution court had granted the defendant's motion to open the dissolution judgment and issued substitute financial orders. This court thereafter reversed the dissolution court's granting of the motion to open and remanded the matter to the trial court with direction to reinstate the original financial orders. The plaintiff thereafter filed a motion for contempt, claiming that the defen- dant had failed to pay her certain amounts set forth in the dissolution court's original financial orders. The trial court declined to find the defendant in contempt and determined that the effective date for the running of interest on the amounts at issue was the date on which the parties' appeals to this court were finally determined. The court subsequently granted the defendant's motion to modify alimony, and the plaintiff appealed to this court. The trial court thereafter determined that it lacked jurisdiction over a motion that the plaintiff had filed requesting that the court order the defendant to endorse certain insur- ance checks for damage to the parties' former marital home. The court also denied another motion for contempt that the plaintiff filed regarding documents necessary to transfer to the defendant the plaintiff's interest in certain companies that the parties owned, and the plaintiff filed an amended appeal with this court. Held: 1. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the defendant's motion to modify his alimony obligation and determining that the defen- dant had established a substantial change in circumstances due to his lower earning capacity: that