Speaker Law
Blog
Posted: Sep 23, 2020, 10:25 AM
A mother’s request to change the school of the parties’ minor child was wrongly denied because the trial judge 1) did not interview the child about his school preference and 2) failed to consider several of the best-interest factors in MCL 722.23, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.
Posted: Sep 9, 2020, 10:55 AM
The trial court should not have denied the defendant’s motion to set aside the parties’ divorce judgment based on alleged fraud because the motion was timely and was allowed under the terms of the divorce settlement agreement, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.
Posted: May 13, 2020, 10:25 AM
The defendant, Anne Jones-Von Greiff, was married to the decedent, Hermann Von Greiff. After 15 years of marriage, the defendant filed for divorce on June 1, 2017. Hermann stipulated that Anne could live in the marital home, to which he never returned, while the divorce was pending. Hermann died on June 17, 2018, just before the divorce judgment was signed and slightly more than a year after the parties had separated.
Posted: May 6, 2020, 12:45 PM
The trial court in this custody action erroneously discounted the role of the parent who worked outside the home and, as a result, improperly ruled that the child only had an established custodial environment with the stay-at-home parent, the Michigan Court of Appeals has decided.
Posted: Apr 29, 2020, 10:50 AM
A father’s use of corporal punishment as a disciplinary method constituted domestic violence and, as a result, the trial court properly modified custody to give the mother sole legal and physical custody of the children, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.
Posted: Mar 25, 2020, 10:05 AM
On appeal, the defendant claimed the trial court’s decision regarding proper cause or change in circumstances was erroneous. Among other things, he challenged the timeliness of the evidence considered by the trial court
Posted: Mar 18, 2020, 9:15 AM
The plaintiff-mother and the defendant-father were married in 2013. They child was born in 2015. A judgment of divorce was entered by the Oakland County Circuit Court in April 2016. The divorce judgment provided that the parties shared joint legal custody of the child and the plaintiff had primary physical custody.
Posted: Feb 19, 2020, 2:15 PM
A settlement agreement signed by the parties in this divorce action was valid and enforceable, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled, even though the mediator did not conduct any domestic violence screening pursuant to the Michigan court rules.
Posted: Feb 12, 2020, 10:40 AM
The plaintiff and the defendant divorced in 2013. Pursuant to a consent judgment, the plaintiff was awarded “sole care, custody and control” of the parties three children and the defendant was ordered to pay child and spousal support.
Posted: Dec 18, 2019, 9:35 AM
The plaintiff and the defendant, who were married for 29 years, entered into a consent judgment of divorce in 2014. The judgment included a spousal support provision that said the plaintiff would receive spousal support for 10 years, until the plaintiff’s death or until she remarried, whichever occurred first
Posted: Dec 11, 2019, 11:50 AM
The ex-wife in Ripley (Docket No. 327285) argued the trial court wrongly allocated two assets to the defendant – the accounts receivable at his law firm and a GTO – without first including their value in the marital estate. The ex-wife also claimed the trial court’s overall division of the marital estate was inequitable.
Posted: Dec 4, 2019, 10:45 AM
The plaintiff and the defendant were married in October 1995. When the couple divorced in 2018, the plaintiff was 58 years old and the defendant was 65 years old. The parties have two children, one of whom was a minor at the time of the divorce.
Posted: May 1, 2019, 3:59 PM
Thirty-seven years after parties were divorced, Oakland Circuit Court Judge Valentine issued a post-judgment order requiring the defendant to pay $2,500 in monthly spousal support to the plaintiff.
Posted: Sep 6, 2018, 12:25 PM
A trial court erred in distributing a divorcing couple’s marital property because the parties’ prenuptial agreement was ignored in doing so, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.
In Silverman v Silverman (Docket No. 336905, unpublished opinion), the Court of Appeals said the trial court could not “simply disregard the prenuptial agreement and resort to equitable considerations without any analysis as to why it was doing so.”
Posted: Aug 15, 2018, 9:15 AM
A spousal support award and the division of property in a divorce case must be vacated because the trial court engaged in a “parade of errors” – namely, denying the husband’s constitutional right to counsel, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.
Posted: Aug 8, 2018, 1:15 PM
Michigan family-law attorneys can place a lien on a client’s property to be awarded in a divorce proceeding as payment for legal services – as long as certain requirements are met, according to a State Bar of Michigan ethics opinion.
Posted: Aug 1, 2018, 9:15 AM
The Michigan Court of Appeals has vacated an order denying a divorced father’s request to change the school his children attend, finding the trial court failed to 1) address the children’s established custodial environment, 2) describe the applicable burden of proof and 3) consider the Child Custody Act’s best-interest factors.
In Marik v Marik (Docket No. 333687), the Court of Appeals remanded the case so the trial court could properly handle these issues.
Posted: Apr 3, 2018, 9:49 PM
A recent Georgia Court of Appeals decision resolves a two-year-long jurisdictional dispute between spouses regarding whether, under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), their custody case should proceed in Michigan or Georgia.
Posted: Mar 14, 2018, 5:58 PM
The three-year time limit for filing a paternity challenge under the Revocation of Paternity Act (RPA) does not apply when the presumed father raises the issue in a divorce action, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled.
Posted: Mar 5, 2018, 2:15 PM
A trial court erroneously used a “preponderance of the evidence” standard to determine it was in the child’s best interest to change the established custodial arrangement, the Michigan Court of Appeals has ruled in a 2-1 decision that may create more confusion as to how to apply the burden in custody cases.
Content © 2020 Speaker Law Firm, PLLC | Website designed by AE Lansing Web Design
All major credit cards accepted.
All major credit cards accepted.