The function of the Appellate Court, as it explained in the 2000
decision in Hopfer v. Hopfer, "is not to retry the facts of the
case, substitute [its] judgment for that of the trial court, or
articulate or clarify the trial court's decision." The
defendant, Andrew Foley, appealed from the judgment of the trial
court denying three motions for contempt that he filed against
the plaintiff, Joanne Foley, his former wife. The defendant
requested that the Appellate Court review the trial court's
decisions anew and issue orders  to the plaintiff, such as to
refinance the former marital home in her own name, to end
certain child care bills and to stop therapy sessions for one of
the parties' children. Essentially the defendant was asking the
Appellate Court to retry the facts and issue new order which it
is unable to do. Additionally, even if the defendant had sought
review of the trial court's orders instead of a de novo hearing,
the panel would decline to review his claims due to inadequate
briefing. The defendant