Annotation to former section 46-49: Parties to divorce proceeding may submit to court an agreement concerning education of any of their children and such agreement may be incorporated by reference in order or decree of court. 33 CS 210. Annotations to present section: Cited. 177 Conn. 47. Failure of referee to conduct a searching inquiry into acceptability of a divorce settlement does not subject judgment to collateral attack as miscarriage of justice. Id., 173. Operates prospectively, cannot be applied retroactively. Id., 327. Cited. 183 Conn. 35; 184 Conn. 558; 185 Conn. 156; Id., 573; 186 C. 773. Because agreement was concealed from the trial court and was thus contrary to public policy, it was void and unenforceable; because, as a result of the agreement, both parties filed misleading and inaccurate financial affidavits, and because trial court should have ordered a new hearing on the financial and property division issues, a new trial was ordered on those issues. 187 C. 315. Cited. 188 Conn. 98; 190 C. 674; 194 Conn. 312; 195 C. 491; 196 Conn. 260; 200 C. 202; 201 Conn. 50; 214 C. 99; 217 C. 394; 220 C. 212; 228 Conn. 85; 231 C. 168; 235 C. 45; 237 C. 481. Trial court does not have authority to modify an agreement concerning child support that has been incorporated by reference into court decree dissolving a marriage in absence of a written agreement between parties permitting such modification. 262 C. 355. Trial court has jurisdiction over motions for postmajority child support modifications. 266 C. 649. Cited. 1 CA 578. Fraudulent nondisclosure discussed. 2 CA 179; Id., 239. Cited. 3 CA 423; 6 CA 271; 11 CA 268; 13 CA 355; 19 Conn.App. 146; Id., 161; 24 Conn.App. 343; 25 Conn.App. 210; 28 CA 208; 29 CA 369; 34 Conn.App. 462; judgment reversed, see 232 Conn. 750; Id., 785; judgment reversed, see 235 Conn. 45; 35 Conn.App. 421; 43 CA 575. Trial court lacked jurisdiction to enforce parties’ oral stipulation concerning payment of postmajority support because agreement was not reduced to writing as required by statute. 47 CA 354. Court lacks jurisdiction to modify postmajority support where no written agreement to modify. 48 CA 409. Section provides court with jurisdiction to incorporate a separation agreement into its order or decree if upon review it finds the agreement fair and equitable under the circumstances. 60 CA 337. Trial court did not abuse its discretion by incorporating an agreement requiring additional 5-year post-judgment payment of life insurance premiums. 83 Conn.App. 478. Settlement offer could not be binding agreement without court’s independent evaluation of agreement for fairness and equity. 91 CA 579. Section requires an inquiry into the parties’ financial circumstances and the actual needs of the parties without explicitly requiring a finding that a party has knowingly entered into the agreement. 177 CA 103. Cited. 35 Conn.Supp. 237; 44 Conn.Supp. 431. Written agreements for support of adult children may be incorporated by reference into dissolution decree or may be the subject of orders of court and are enforceable through contempt proceedings. 49 CS 238. Subsec. (a): Specifically grants court authority to incorporate by reference into its judgment of dissolution a fair and equitable separation agreement concerning several enumerated items, including disposition of property, thereby making it an order or decree of the court. 84 CA 415. Without separate evaluation by court to determine whether settlement agreement was fair and equitable, it could not become a settlement agreement as to the parties regarding their marital property, and court was free to distribute the property in a manner it determined was fair and equitable. 91 Conn.App. 579. Subsec. (c): An agreement to arbitrate contained in a prenuptial agreement is by definition an agreement to arbitrate issues that would only arise once the parties are involved in an action for dissolution; all agreements to arbitrate controversies between parties to a marriage are covered, regardless of when the parties entered into the agreement. 322 C. 828. Trial court erred in ordering parties to submit to arbitration to resolve dispute over unreimbursed medical expenses of minor children because parties had not executed a voluntary arbitration agreement; Subsec. expressly prohibits parties from arbitrating issues related to child support, which may preclude parties from submitting dispute concerning minor child’s unreimbursed medical expenses to arbitration. 156 CA 628.