Jail for Dad of 23 kids: over $500,000 owed in child support

A recent Detroit Free Press article and ABC News article discussed the case of a Western Michigan dad of 23 kids who was sentenced to jail for owing over $500,000 in child support.

First, this case is obviously unique, as he has fathered over 20 children. It is also unique because of the excessive amount of overdue child support. However, prison sentences are not as uncommon as you may think.

In Michigan, child support obligations are enforced by not only the courts, but also the local prosecutors and even the attorney general’s office. For non-payment of child support, the Friend of the Court can garnish your tax refunds, suspend your drivers license, file a lien against your property, report the debt to credit agencies, garnish a private pension or retirement, and issue a bench warrant for your arrest. Additionally, in cases where the amount of support owing is excessive, the Friend of the Court can refer the case to the local prosecutor for felony charges. Felony non-support cases can result in jail sentences, as evidenced by the results of the case involving the deadbeat dad with 23 kids.

What people don’t always realize is that child support is modifiable in Michigan. The Friend of the Court will conduct an automatic review of child support every 36 months. However, if there is a substantial change in income, a parent can file a request for modification and have it reviewed, even if it hasn’t been 36 months.

The lesson is clear—if there is a substantial change in income, it is important to request modification of child support. If the person paying child support becomes delinquent, the penalties can be excessive and extreme, and, in some cases, avoidable.

You can read the Detroit Free Press article here: Man linked to 23 kids gets prison in child support case

You can read the ABC News article here: Ultra Deadbeat Dad gets 23 Months in Jail


If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
 

What is Divorce Mediation?

The divorce trial of Dodgers’ owner Frank McCourt & his wife Jamie has taken a brief pause so that the couple and their attorneys can go through Mediation today in order to try to resolve and settle their divorce.

What exactly is Mediation?

Mediation in divorce cases is a private session between the couple, their lawyers, and a neutral Mediator, usually a lawyer who has been trained in Mediation, where they freely and openly discuss settlement of all or some of the issues in the divorce. In Michigan, everything that happens in Mediation is confidential, and offers and counter-offers exchanged in Mediation cannot be used in the Divorce trial or further proceedings. The Mediator’s role is to encourage the couple to work out their differences and come to a mutual resolution of all issues. If an agreement is reached, it is reduced to a final writing, a Divorce Judgment, and entered by the Court, thus ending the divorce.

Many divorce cases resolve in Mediation, and it is by far a less expensive alternative than a divorce trial. However, even in the middle of trial, like the McCourt’s trial, Mediation is also a tool to try to resolve issues that remain outstanding and disputed.

You can read the LA Times article here: Frank McCourt attorney's admission sets the stage for a possible settlement


If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.
 
.

The Costly Lesson of Full Disclosure to Friend of the Court

In Michigan, child support is modifiable upon change of circumstances, and in order to modify the amount of child support, you must file a motion/request with Friend of the Court. A referee in Friend of the Court then reviews each parent’s income, health care costs, child care costs, and parenting time and makes a recommendation based upon those facts. Once a recommendation is made, each parent has an opportunity to object to the recommendation, and if there is an objection filed, the matter goes to the Judge for a formal hearing.

So what happens if during the entire process one of the parents is less than forthcoming with their income information? What happens if one parent deliberately misstates their income?

The Court of Appeals recently discussed this exact situation in Keinz v Keinz, unpublished opinion per curiam of the Court of Appeals, issued September 16, 2010 (Docket No. 292781).

In Keinz v Keinz, a modification request was filed by the mother 3 years after the divorce was final. At the referee hearing, the father not only stated that his gross annual income was $41k, he produced a letter from his employer indicating the same thing. The referee made a recommendation, and the mother objected to that recommendation. Eventually a full evidentiary hearing was held by the Judge, at which time it was discovered that the father actually earned $81k annually, double the income he asserted at the referee hearing.

The father’s justification was that he was working overtime, but that due to his health, he didn’t expect to work any more overtime. However, it was discovered that at the time that he asserted that he would only earn $41k annually, he had already earned $40k and only half the year was over.

The mother asked the Court to make the father pay for her attorney fees stating that his position/defense was frivolous, which means that the father asserted a position that he knew was not true. While the trial court initially denied the mother’s request for attorney fees, the Court of Appeals determined that the father deliberately deceived the referee by offering evidence that he knew was not true. The Court of Appeals determined that the father’s position in the child support hearings was truly frivolous and because the mother ultimately prevailed with a higher child support amount (albeit after numerous court hearings), the father was responsible for paying the mother’s attorney fees.

The cost for deliberately deceiving Friend of the Court: paying for two attorneys.




If you are interested in learning more, please call Wendy Alton at 734-665-4441 or email her at walton@psedlaw.com. More information about her firm, Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C., can be found here: www.psedlaw.com.