I’ve written a lot about CT Family Court and the case of Ambrose v Ambrose. It is the story of disgraced Hollywood TV writer Chris Ambrose who used the CT Family Court to buy custody of his children and terminate his wife’s parental rights. It cost him about a million dollars in legal and other professional fees.
The three children haven’t seen their mother in almost two years.
Karen Riordan and Chris Ambrose
The mother, Karen Riordan Ambrose, filed a motion today to clarify a few things. It seems Ambrose did buy custody in that marketplace called CT Family Court, but with stolen money — her money, money that he stole from the marital funds, and her inheritance, just before filing for divorce.
CT Family Court judges and the attorneys all understand. Attorneys have great understanding that they have to get paid after all.
What’s clear and convincing from Karen’s powerful motion is that permission to loot the marital assets and steal his wife’s inheritance was granted early on to Ambrose, by the lawyers and one particular lady lawyer, Jocelyn Hurwitz, the Guardian ad Litem, who is supposed to represent the children’s best interest and has billed to date, $200,000.
Riordan seeks a mistrial, and when you read her motion, you will wonder how in hell she won’t get it unless, of course, there is corruption in CT Family Court.
I will make the occasional comment in brackets and bold and add some pictures with captions, which were not included in the original motion, but here it is.
I know you will think this is all too unbelievable, that these kinds of things cannot happen. But I assure you they do happen. They just aren’t spoken about.
***
FBT FA19 6088163 SUPERIOR COURT CHRISTOPHER AMBROSE BRIDGEPORT J.D. v. AT RFTD KAREN AMBROSE MARCH 15, 2022 MOTION FOR MISTRIAL
The undersigned moves for mistrial based on the fundamental unfairness and abuse of process shown in the conditions and history listed herein:
Karen Riordan Ambrose is now homeless though she was a millionaire.
CONDITIONS
1- I am indigent, homeless, and living with friends outside the state of CT. I do not have the funds to travel to CT.
2- I have been denied access to joint marital funds since 2019, when the plaintiff, [husband] Christopher Ambrose, commenced this action.
3- Judge Thomas Moukawsher suspended my trial for well over a month to admonish former attorney Nickola Cunha after she advocated for the recusal of Judge Gerard Adelman.
Attorney Nickola Cunha [center] walks into court with Karen Riordan. Investigative reporter Wayne Dolcefino, who has been covering the case, is on their left.
4 – I am without counsel since Jan. 2022, when CT Superior Court Judge Thomas Moukawsher disbarred my attorney, Nickola Cunha, based on conduct demonstrated as legal counsel in my case.
Judge Thomas G. Moukawsher did not like that Attorney Cunha challenged the process of CT Family CT. He disbarred her.
5- I cannot afford new counsel.
6- On May 6, 2021, This Court [Judge Gerard Adelman] ordered Mr. Ambrose to make monthly ‘spousal payments’ every month during the pendency of this case.
7- Mr. Ambrose made four payments, then without evidence of change in circumstance, stopped, leaving me without funds.
8- The Court was noticed about financial deprivation/failure of duty to disclose on March 31, 2021.
9- The Court was noticed again on financial coercive control on August 23, 2021.
10- The Court was noticed again in October 2021.
11- In February 2022, this Court ordered Mr. Ambrose to make reduced spousal payments beginning in March.
12- Mr. Ambrose has not made his spousal payment for March. Unilaterally closed account on Feb 8, 2022.
13- He has not made any spousal payments since September 2021.
14- For these reasons: that I am without an attorney due to the findings of, that I cannot afford to retain an attorney, that this Court has not required Mr. Ambrose to pay spousal support despite being repeatedly put on notice, I have no funds to travel to CT and no means to get legal counsel.
15- There is no money to obtain all transcripts covering 36 days of trial; Mr. Ambrose has yet to rest his case. How any attorney would be able to get caught up on nearly three years of prolonged litigation. Adelman, J states, “I haven’t even heard your case.”
Judge Gerard Adelman is presiding in the trial of Ambrose v Riordan — now in its third year and its third judge.
HISTORY
1- Mr. Ambrose and I married on June 4, 2004.
2- We have been wed for almost 18-years.
3- In 2007, we adopted two children.
4- In 2010, we adopted a third child.
5- At Mr. Ambrose’s insistence, after 17 years as a CT Public School teacher, I left a tenured teaching position as a special education teacher employed by the Greenwich School District.
While Chris Ambrose, to disguise his theft of more than $2 million from his wife, has advanced the false and putrid narrative that his wife is mentally ill, the school district she worked at thought differently: She was awarded the Distinguished Teacher Award for her groundbreaking work in special education. https://www.greenwichschools.org/departments/communications/awardsrecognition-programs/distinguished-teachers-awards
6- After we adopted, at Mr. Ambrose’s insistence, I became a full-time, stay-at-home mother.
7- For 13 years, as Mr. Ambrose was largely absent from his children’s lives, I was the children’s primary caretaker and primary attachment figure.
8- His insistence that I remain home with the children full-time persisted even when he was fired, unemployed, and home full-time in 2016. He was adamant I decline even part-time teaching opportunities because I was needed and valuable to our three children.
9- While I did not work outside the home, I contributed valuable efforts in advancing Mr. Ambrose’s career, supporting his ailing parents, and provided substantial assistance in projects that enhanced our marital assets, in addition to caring for our children in CT, while Mr. Ambrose worked as a writer in Los Angeles and NYC.
10- Through his unfortunate but considered actions, Mr. Ambrose’s career came to a sudden end in 2018.
The unfortunate career-killing move by Chris Ambrose was plagiarizing.
11- He returned to CT.
12- During our marriage, we accumulated substantial marital savings and investments, which totaled approximately $2 million.
13- Mr. Ambrose managed our joint assets, which were invested in various investment funds.
14- Mr. Ambrose also managed my maternal inheritance of $150,000, which I received before our marriage.
15- My trust in him as a loyal spouse permitted him to manage our funds without my questioning him about the details of his management of our investments and my inheritance.
16- In April 2018, I informed Amy Wrobel, a marriage counselor, as well as Mr. Ambrose, that our marriage was over, and I wanted a divorce.
17- Mr. Ambrose refused to discuss my decision and immediately locked me out of all financial accounts, changed passcodes to deny me access to our phone records, and blocked me from health insurance records.
18- After his return to CT, and now without work, but with substantial savings, Mr. Ambrose sought a divorce.
19- He filed for divorce on July 19, 2019.
20- Prior to filing for divorce, Mr. Ambrose changed passwords and otherwise took possession of all our accounts, refused to disclose where and if he was moved filed for divorce that he had taken full control of all marital assets and my inheritance, and refused to allow me access to any of our assets or even my maternal inheritance.
21- Since the commencement of the case in July 2019, I have been denied full, fair, and frank disclosures of our marital assets by Mr. Ambrose.
22- Mr. Ambrose has failed to file accurate financial affidavits with the court.
23- I have repeatedly objected in court to Mr. Ambrose’s failure to file financial affidavits and his depriving me of access to our marital assets.
24- Since Mr. Ambrose seized all our marital funds and my inheritance; I was left without funds for my three children and myself.
25- At my counsel’s direction, I made motions on Aug 5, 2019, to secure alimony and child support docket [106] and for the contribution of expenses, [107]
26 The Court failed to act on these motions before Mr. Ambrose filed a Financial Affidavit, and on August 22, 2019, Judge Eddie Rodriguez ordered Mr. Ambrose to file a financial affidavit by Sept. 5, 2019.
27- At that hearing, Mr. Ambrose admitted he had full control of our joint marital assets and my inheritance.
28- He stated that since he managed the marital assets with my consent before his commencement of the divorce action, he was justified in controlling the marital assets, without my consent, during the divorce proceedings.
The relevant testimony:
ATTY CALLAHAN: Mrs. Ambrose at one point asked you for access to the financial accounts, your marital, financial accounts, right?
AMBROSE: Uh-hum.
ATTY CALLAHAN: And she wanted that information to have an adult conversation with you about what was possible for your children in the midst of this divorce—
AMBROSE: Uh-hum.
ATTY CALLAHAN: That you just started, correct?
AMBROSE: Uh-hum.
ATTY CALLAHAN: Yeah?
JUDGE RODRIQUEZ: Yes?
AMBROSE: Yes. I’m sorry. Yes.
ATTY CALLAHAN: And you didn’t give it to her?
AMBROSE: I told her. I said what– I said that it’s the same as before. The mutual fund is the same as it was before. I was not going to give Karen the password to our investment portfolio.
ATTY CALLAHAN: Why?
AMBROSE: Because I don’t trust her.
ATTY CALLAHAN: Okay. Even though you know that there is $150,000 of money that she received from her mother’s estate that you are in control of?
AMBROSE: And the rest of it is– she never had a problem with that. She never asked for access before. And I don’t trust her to have access… And when she started asking for the passwords to the Fidelity account, it was the same kind of dynamic. And I was worried that Karen– if I gave her the passwords, she could go in, she could sell stock, she could deplete the whole thing, she could lock me out of the account….
ATTY CALLAHAN: So, you have control over that?
AMBROSE: I — I have– well, control, as I have the entire marriage, and she’s never asked once before this year to see the accounts.
29- Mr. Ambrose’s argument that he had the right to lock me out of our joint marital assets account because he did not trust that I would take control of the money, lock him out, and deplete the account is a textbook example of projection.
30- It is precisely what he did to me: Lock me out, take control of the money, and according to testimony in court, he has depleted almost all of the money.
31- His argument that he took my share of the money because he thought I would take his share of the money may pass muster in Family Court, where the law is made up as they go, but nowhere else.
32- If two people owned a pot of money equally and one stole the entire pot, saying I am justified in stealing because I was afraid you will steal from me, this would not be defensible in criminal court in any courtroom in the USA.
33- If one business partner took control of the joint assets of his partner on the theory that the partner would otherwise take the assets, it would be dubbed a hostile takeover, and it would not be defensible in civil court.
34- Chris Ambrose took money that did belong to him, but to both of us, 50 -50, in July 2019, and to this date, I have been denied access to any of it, in addition to his denying me $150,000, which is my maternal inheritance.
35- Having complete control of our marital assets, he can retain attorneys and other professionals to help him prevail in this case, without having to disclose if the money he pays these professionals [is] for his own benefit, is coming out of his share, my share, or both.
36- Meantime, without access to our joint accounts, I cannot afford a lawyer.
37- Mr. Ambrose had not worked since 2018 when he was caught in an act which he described to the custody evaluator as “shameful” and “hugely embarrassing.”
38- He is dependent on our life savings.
39- Only Mr. Ambrose has access to our life savings.
40- In addition, Mr. Ambrose converted my inheritance bequeathed to me before our marriage simply because I entrusted him with its management.
Karen inherited $150,000 from her mother Adele before marrying Chris Ambrose. After they married, she turned it over to him to manage for her. He stole every last dime.
41- To this date, he refuses to return my inheritance or even disclose where the money is.
42- He admitted this in his August 22, 2019 testimony:
ATTY CALLAHAN: Okay. Even though you know that there is $150,000 of money that she received from her mother’s estate that you are in control of?
AMBROSE: And the rest of it is– she never had a problem with that. She never asked for access before. And I don’t trust her to have access…
ATTY CALLAHAN: So, you have control over that?
AMBROSE: I — I have– well, control, as I have the entire marriage, and she’s never asked once before this year to see the accounts.
43- Not only did Mr. Ambrose admit he locked me out of our marital accounts, essentially converting all marital assets to his exclusive control, but he would not disclose where the marital assets were or how much he was spending.
44- His outlandish testimony that since I consented for him to manage my inheritance while we were married, prior to his filing for divorce, he was somehow entitled to keep my inheritance without my consent, once he filed for divorce, should not pass muster in any courtroom.
45- After his testimony admitting he had seized our marital assets and my inheritance, on Aug. 22, 2019, Judge Rodriquez ordered Mr. Ambrose to file a FA. “All right. The date I’m picking is September 5th.”
46- In violation of Judge Rodriquez’s order, Mr. Ambrose did not file a financial affidavit by Sept 5 or any other date.
47- Attorney Aldrich secured GAL Jocelyn Hurwitz at $400/hr. and insisted on the sale of our Westport home in August 2020 while failing her duty to [require Ambrose to] disclose financial assets.
48- The case was transferred to Judge Jane Grossman in September 2019.
Judge Jane Grossman
49- During the next 12 months, Mr. Ambrose had full access to our entire marital assets and my inheritance and did not file a financial affidavit.
50- Judge Rodriquez ordered primary physical custody of our three children to me with shared legal custody, and still, my motions for child support, alimony, and contribution of expenses were ignored by the court, leaving me with no access to a life savings we shared.
51- On April 24, 2020, Judge Grossman “temporarily” terminated my parental rights and awarded full custody of our children to Mr. Ambrose, based on a singular report of a custody evaluator, endorsed by GAL Jocelyn Hurwitz, both of whom were paid by Mr. Ambrose, from our marital funds.
52- Both the GAL and custody evaluator were aware that Mr. Ambrose controlled the money and that I had none.
53- GAL Jocelyn Hurwitz, custody evaluator Dr. Biren-Caverly, family, ‘reunification therapist’ Dr. Robert Horwitz, psychologist Bill Horn, social worker Alison Kravitz, psychologist Deborah Gruen, and psychiatrist Paul El-Fishawy, have each been paid solely by Mr. Ambrose with money from our joint marital funds. Each of these providers has denied me copies of contracts, records, and billings since entering litigation in July 2019. Each has received full funding from Mr. Ambrose.
54- A full year after Judge Rodriquez ordered Mr. Ambrose to file a FA, he had not filed a FA.
55- In August 2020, Judge Jane Grossman confirmed Mr. Ambrose had not filed a financial affidavit with the court. Excerpt from transcript: August 31, 2020: Bridgeport, CT. Courtroom of Judge Jane Grossman:
ATTY CUNHA: I would like the court to note that there are no financial affidavits that have been filed in this matter… I see absolutely no financial affidavit. How that is the status, being that this case is as old as it is, I don’t understand. However, I would indicate to this court, in absolutely no way, shape, or form could you enter orders without financial affidavits indicating what the party’s financial statuses are….
GROSSMAN, J: I will note that there is a financial affidavit for the defendant filed item number 131. Attorney Cunha’s right; I don’t see a financial affidavit filed with the court for the plaintiff… it looks like we need one. I’m certainly capable of asking for one.
56- While Judge Grossman said she was capable of asking for a Financial Affidavit from Mr. Ambrose, she never did.
57- Mr. Ambrose did not file a financial affidavit, avoiding the filing a financial affidavit disclosing what he has done with our marital assets for the second year in litigation.
58- Yet, in August 2020, our marital house was sold. Judge Jane Grossman concurred with [Ambrose’s] Attorney [Nancy] Aldrich that the house needed to be sold because our family was running out of money and attorneys needed to be paid. My half of the equity was ordered to go to pay attorney fees and the GAL’s fees while I had no access to our marital assets or my inheritance.
59- The court ordered that Mr. Ambrose and I pay the GAL’s fees on a 50-50 basis.
60- Mr. Ambrose was given 100 percent credit for all payments made to the GAL with our marital assets. None of it was applied to my share of the bill.
61- After two years of litigation, on May 6, 2021, Your Honor [Judge Adelman] ordered spousal payments (coming out of our joint assets since Mr. Ambrose did not work but was living off marital assets, which he alone had and any payments he made to me were coming from our money, not his) of $4500/month.
62- On May 6, 2021, Your Honor ordered Mr. Ambrose to pay my outstanding bills and debts, evidencing that the Court understood he had access to marital funds. Mr. Ambrose has paid nothing.
63- During the entire pendency of this divorce, now in its 33rd month, Mr. Ambrose, while having access to our marital assets and my inheritance, made only FOUR spousal payments totaling $18,000.
64- Without Mr. Ambrose making court-ordered spousal payments, I was evicted from my apartment (see MMX-CV-22-6033227-S)
65- Though he did not make his court-ordered spousal payments, he was nonetheless able, without any financial disclosures, to persuade this court to reduce spousal payments [which he had not been paying], from $4500 to $3100, by falsely representing to the court that my rent had been reduced to $2100. Here’s the copy of my rental agreement to show that it was $2,800, as previously reported to the court (HTTPS:// civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/DocumentInquiry/DocumentInquiry.aspx? DocumentNo=21992324).
66- It is a cruel irony that while this court permitted the Guardian ad Litem to attend every day of court, billing at $3,200 per day, half of which is ordered by the court to be paid by me, the court has reduced my monthly payment to $3,100 per month.
The guardian ad litem, assigned by the court and paid by the father, Chris Ambrose, to look after “the children’s best interests.”
67- Attorney Cunha took issue with daily attendance of the GAL attending all trial dates. I pointed out to Your Honor that GAL Jocelyn Hurwitz had not spoken to me since November 5, 2019, and had only seen my children two times before ripping them from my care. Your Honor said it was judicial discretion [to allow the GAL Hurwitz to sit in on every hour of trial — a $100,000 cost] and indeed, Jocelyn Hurwitz has now sat through 36 days of trial at $400/hour, and the plaintiff has yet to rest his case.
68- In addition, Your Honor ordered that I sign documents liquidating mutual funds, part of our joint marital accounts, known as the Bruce Funds, which Mr. Ambrose could not convert to his sole use and custody because it required both his and my signature.
69- Absent full and frank financial disclosure affidavit, and based solely on the word of Mr. Ambrose that these funds were the “only remaining funds” remaining from our entire marital assets, this Court ordered me to sign over to him the Bruce Funds for his exclusive control and use.
70- Without requiring financial disclosure, Your Honor ordered that I sign a document permitting Mr. Ambrose to liquidate the account of approximately $50,000. Out of this amount, Your Honor ordered Mr. Ambrose to pay one month of my past-due rent and one month of current rent, totaling $9,000.
71- Mr. Ambrose was free to do whatever he pleased with the remaining $41,000 – despite these funds being equally mine and Mr. Ambrose’s.
72- In addition to this, Mr. Ambrose, if he is telling the truth that there are no other remaining funds, either depleted all our marital assets – or he has secreted them – more than a million dollars, in two and half years, while I have received only $18,000.
73- Under this court, I have been denied the accounting of life savings accrued throughout an 18-year marriage.
74- I have been denied the right to be informed and participate in financial decisions regarding liquidating a lifetime of savings.
75- The court permitted Mr. Ambrose to liquidate assets make transactions and payments to whomever he chose, in whatever amount he determines, without my consent and without financial disclosure of his actions.
Nancy Aldrich works closely with the GAL.
76- While Mr. Ambrose’s attorney, Nancy Aldrich, opined that a stay at home mother is not entitled to martial assets, and who wrote to my former attorney in an email [Thursday, June 4, 2020] “Why does your client believe she is entitled to any funds when she has contributed nothing throughout the marriage,” marital property laws in CT do not support her view.
77- Your Honor ordered that I sign joint federal tax returns prepared by Mr. Ambrose.
78- I refused to sign these federal tax returns because these must be signed under oath and under penalty of perjury.
79- I could not swear to their truthfulness when there has been no full disclosure of marital assets, including the liquidation of more than a million dollars of marital funds by Mr. Ambrose since 2018.
80- Mr. Ambrose admitted in this Court that he dissolved a marital property company, Eyes Above Productions, between 2019 and 2021. He did so without my informed consent. This company was created during our marriage in 2006.
81- Mr. Ambrose disclosed no further information, and Your Honor has not required him to do so.
82- Yet your Honor ordered me to sign sworn federal tax returns based on earnings filtered or possibly laundered [I have no way of knowing] through Eyes Above Productions.
83- Your Honor then eliminated the need for my signature on the Bruce funds, terminating my interest in our shared marital assets.
84- Your Honor made these rulings with full knowledge that Mr. Ambrose fraudulently signed my name on tax returns in 2019 and fraudulently signed my name to a financial agreement with the Westport Public School System and kept the money amounting to more than $100,000.
85- Since I have been deprived of marital assets that Mr. Ambrose has had 100% access to, while he can afford his lawyer to appear in the case at the next hearing, I am not financially able to retain a lawyer.
86- I’m not in a position to represent myself.
87- He has put on his case for 36 days. The trial is not half over. Plaintiff has not even finished his case.
88- The family house was sold without Mr. Ambrose filing a financial with the court.
The family house in Westport, CT, was sold to pay lawyers and the GAL out of Karen’s share.
89- Mr. Ambrose was granted temporary custody of the children without a financial affidavit.
90- Your Honor’s ruling of February 15, 2022, that whether Mr. Ambrose converted our marital assets, spent them, secreted them, or stole them, is to be left to Mr. Ambrose’s cross-examination, is an outlandish ruling and a very dangerous one as a precedent.
91- I am now destitute. Mr. Ambrose has all our marital money which [if] he has [not] depleted [it] and my inheritance if he has not converted it and he has full custody of our children.
92- He has demonstrated that if you seize possession of your spouse’s share of the assets, in CT Family Court, “possession is all 10 points of the law.”
93- For these reasons, I request that this trial be suspended until Mr. Ambrose pays to me 50% of our marital assets as of the time he converted the assets into his control, in July 2019, and that Mr. Ambrose pays me my maternal inheritance, which he admitted under oath is $150,000, and that he has full possession of.
94- Once Mr. Ambrose pays me my share of the marital assets that he confiscated and my mother’s inheritance, I will retain an attorney and continue the case, or if your honor declares a mistrial, I can start anew with a new a new judge and receive a fair trial.
95- On March 31, 2021, the first day of trial, Your Honor stated, “Anytime, anytime children are in the case for almost 600 days, it’s a disaster.” You did not disagree with the grounds presented for a motion for mistrial but used judicial discretion and told me it was not in my or my children’s best interest.
96- By October 2021, the plaintiff had utilized 30+ days of trial. Limited court time requests for vacations and holidays has prolonged litigation. Your Honor pointed out 15 continuances were granted to Attorney Cunha however, not one continuance was requested on my behalf. Your Honor acknowledged continuances favor of the Plaintiff, and indeed they have, which is why the ‘temporary order due to Covid’ on April 24, 2020, which has now persisted for two years, is so problematic.
97- Twice in October 2021, without any motion for recusal filed, Your Honor stated you were declaring a mistrial. This would have been a reasonable outcome, as confirmed at the same time by Attorney Aldrich. Your Honor also stated you had not yet heard my case.
98- Since October, Your Honor canceled all trial dates, and then Attorney Moukawsher suspended my trial indefinitely. My attorney was disbarred for conduct demonstrated while acting as my legal counsel throughout 18 months of representation. Judge Moukawsher and friend of the court, Leanne Larson, made harsh conclusions on public record—listed on my family court docket and disbarred my attorney for life.
99- These factors preclude my attending a hearing on March 16, 2022. With my share of the marital assets and my inheritance, I will be able to defend myself on equal footing as the plaintiff has, something I have been denied since entering litigation in July 2019.
100- WHEREFORE, mistrial be declared on cause of fundamental unfairness and abuse of process.
_______________________
Karen Riordan, Pro S
