John H. Van Lenten is a member of the firm’s Litigation Department and also serves in the firm’s appellate and family law areas. His broad-based practice focuses on complex litigation including all aspects of family law and appellate matters.
John has experience handling family law cases and appeals.
In the area of family law, John is an experienced divorce attorney who handles prenuptial agreements, dissolution litigation and negotiation, child custody and support issues, and post judgment modifications. Where children are involved, John helps his clients reach a negotiated settlement to protect the best interests of the children and preserve the divorcing parties’ relationship so they can co-parent their children into the future.
John’s appellate practice covers a wide variety of legal issues, ranging from constitutional matters to domestic relations. He also has experience arguing appeals before both the Appellate and Supreme Courts of the State of Connecticut. Additionally, John consults with counsel at the trial level, in complicated legal matters or in preparation for potential appellate issues.
Connecticut Bar Association
Fairfield County Bar Association
Greater Danbury Bar Association
Greater Bridgeport Bar Association
Served as a law clerk to the Hon. Barry R. Schaller of the Connecticut Appellate Court
Court Rules in Favor of Client in Wood v. Wood
Connecticut Reports, October 27, 2015
Attorney John Van Lenten successfully represented the mother of two children on appeal from her former spouse’s challenge of the Connecticut Superior Court’s lump sum property distribution award to the mother. The father had argued the court did not act within its discretion when awarding the property distribution.
Court Rules in Favor of Client in Vagnone v. Vagnone
The Connecticut Law Reporter, November 7, 2011
The Connecticut Law Reporter published the State of Connecticut Superior Court opinion issued in Vagnone v. Vagnone in its November 7, 2011, issue. Attorney John Van Lenten successfully represented the mother of a mentally disabled child who sought to extend child support to the age of 21. The father had argued the court lacked jurisdiction to modify support orders.