Laura R. Shattuck

LAURA R. SHATTUCK is a partner and co-founder of PARRINO|SHATTUCK, PC. She is an active litigator and has substantial experience working on complicated cases. Her practice is dedicated to representing clients in all aspects of family law, including divorce, alimony, property division, child custody, child support, post-judgment modification, and post-judgment contempt. She is a Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent-rated attorney.

Shattuck is admitted to practice in Connecticut; the U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut; and the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York. She serves as a special master for family matters in the Judicial District of Stamford/Norwalk at Stamford and Judicial District of Fairfield at Bridgeport. Additionally, she is a member of the American, Connecticut, and Fairfield County bar associations.

Shattuck is an active volunteer and has served on the board of the March of Dimes Fairfield County Division. She partakes in the Connecticut Judicial Branch Stamford Family Volunteer Attorney Program as well.

In 1991, Shattuck earned a bachelor's degree from Loyola University. In 1999, she earned her juris doctor degree from the Quinnipiac University School of Law, cum laude, and also received a merit-based scholarship, a Service to Community Award, and a Distinguished Academic Achievement Award. Furthermore, she is a graduate of the ABA-NITA Family Law Trial Advocacy Institute.

LANDMARK CASES

Tanzman v. Meurer - A trial court that predicates a financial support order on a party's earning capacity must ascertain the particular dollar amount of the party's earning capacity.

Powell-Ferri v. Ferri - Based on Massachusetts law, it was proper for trustees to transfer funds from one trust that let the party husband withdraw principal to a second trust from which he could not withdraw principal. The automatic orders did not require the husband to sue his family member trustees for return of the assets.

Dowd v. Dowd - Although the husband was aware of his alimony obligations under the separation agreement, he failed to comply based on a creative but meritless interpretation of the agreement. An award of counsel fees and interest was proper.