Divorcing in Michigan Now requires Full Financial Disclosures

Divorces can be expensive, especially when one spouse has to conduct extensive discovery, or in other words, send the other spouse numerous requests for information about their income and assets.  While some spouses do openly share this type of information, some do not, and that lack of sharing of information can be one of the leading causes of higher attorney fees.

The Michigan Supreme Court, however, has recently revised three Michigan Court Rules in order to streamline and simplify the exchange of financial information in divorces.  Effective January 1, 2020, divorcing spouses must now automatically provide full financial disclosures under oath of their employment, income, assets and debts.  They are also limited in the type of discovery they can use, and discovery use or abuse can be a basis for a request for attorney fees.

 First, MCR 3.206(C) was revised to include a provision that within 28 days of the filing of the Answer to the Complaint for Divorce, divorcing spouses must fill out and exchange a Domestic Relations Verified Financial Information Form.  

Here is the form:  https://courts.michigan.gov/Administration/SCAO/Forms/courtforms/cc320.pdf.

This form requires full disclosures of employment, income, assets, and debts.  It must be signed under oath in the presence of a notary.  The form also requires that documentation be attached:  recent paystubs and tax returns, and recent statements for credit card or loan accounts.  

Second, MCR 3.201(C) was revised to include a limitation on formal discovery in the form of interrogatories.  Interrogatories are a type of discovery in which formal written questions are submitted to the other spouse.  While one used to be able to send as many interrogatories as desired (within reason), divorcing couples are now limited to 35 interrogatories.

Third, MCR 3.206(D) was revised to allow for a request and award for attorney fees for spouses who lack the ability to pay for appropriate discovery, and for spouses who are on the receiving end of discovery conducted in violation of the Michigan Court Rules.

The revisions to the discovery process should help move cases along more quickly as the exchange of financial information is required early in the case.  It should also help to conserve costs within the divorce, particularly as those costs are usually paid out of the joint marital estate.  It should also help clarify the grounds for the basis of attorney fee requests.  Divorce is a stressful process, and these not so minor court rule revisions should help alleviate some of that stress.

Does Remarriage Automatically Terminate Spousal Support?

One of the most frequent questions our divorce clients ask is: “Does spousal support automatically ends if the person receiving support remarries?”

The law states that unless you agree to other terms in your divorce judgment, a remarriage is considered a change in circumstances. The court may terminate spousal support if the person receiving support remarries. MCL 552.13. It’s not an automatic termination, but remarriage is a change in circumstances that authorizes the court to end spousal support if the court chooses to do so.

You can also agree in your divorce judgment that spousal support will end when the person receiving support remarries. If this is the agreement, then support would end upon remarriage.

If a remarriage is a change in circumstances for either modifying or terminating spousal support, what exactly is considered remarriage? That may seem like a straightforward question, but it was a question that went to the Michigan Court of Appeals in the case of Lueck v Lueck, a published case decided in May 2019.

In Lueck, the husband and wife agreed in their divorce judgment that spousal support would continue for a set amount of time or “until wife remarries.” After the divorce, the wife met someone special and had a religious commitment ceremony at her church where they exchanged traditional vows and rings. However, there were no witnesses and they didn’t apply for a marriage license.

The husband who had been paying spousal support filed a motion with the court to terminate spousal support because the wife remarried. The husband argued that the divorce judgment referenced remarriage as a termination event, not just a “legal marriage,” and the commitment ceremony was essentially a marriage ceremony. After a full evidentiary hearing, the trial court agreed with the husband and concluded that the wife’s actions were done to defraud the court and circumvent the divorce judgment so that she could continue to collect spousal support. The court determined that equity required that spousal support be terminated.

The wife appealed the trial court’s decision. The Court of Appeals disagreed with the trial court and overturned the ruling. The Court of Appeals cited to Michigan law, which states that Michigan doesn’t recognize common law marriage. A marriage license is required in order to legally marry in Michigan. MCL 551.2; MCL 551.101. The only marriage recognized under Michigan law is one that is based upon a marriage license. The Court of Appeals stated that the divorce judgment was unambiguous when it referenced remarriage, as marriage could only mean legal marriage pursuant to a marriage license. The wife could continue to collect spousal support as she wasn’t legally remarried.

The husband has asked for leave to appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court, so stay tuned!

Removing the “Sheen” from Celebrity Divorce

Sorry, Charlie. As if Charlie Sheen hasn’t had enough “winning” media coverage—he received even more as his divorce with Brooke Mueller was finalized this week. The media has focused solely on money (big surprise), so all news stories have only discussed the amount of the property settlement and monthly child support award.

However, TMZ posted the actual divorce judgment online here: In Re Marriage of Sheen. There are some interesting things to note in that Judgment other than just how much money was awarded.

First, despite the fact that Charlie and Brooke are celebrities, the custody, parenting time and child support provisions of their Judgment look pretty similar to the provisions that are in most “average Joe” divorce judgments, including those that I have drafted. For example, Charlie and Brooke share legal custody of their 2 year old boys, Bob & Max. While Brooke has sole physical custody, the parenting time is pretty equally shared. Brooke and Charlie share all holidays and have equal vacation time with the kids. They also agreed to allow the other to take the kids out of state without advance written permission from each other. Charlie must provide health insurance for the boys, and Brooke and Charlie agree to equally share the cost of any of the kids’ extra-curricular activities. Brooke and Charlie also agree that neither can make unilateral decisions about where the boys attend school, but if private school is chosen, Charlie will pay the tuition. Those are pretty “normal” provisions in any divorce.

One of the more interesting and unique provisions in the Judgment involves child support. Brooke was awarded $55,000 per month (yes, per month) for child support for the boys. The Judgment goes on to state that Brooke’s child support shall never be less than the child support that Charlie Sheen pays to his other ex-wife, Denise Richards. The Judgment continues, stating that Charlie and Brooke both recognize that Denise has more assets and earning capacity then Brooke, and that Denise’s children have trust funds, while Brooke’s children do not. Thus, the absolute minimum child support that Brooke will receive will never be less than child support paid to Denise. This is a pretty interesting provision because it provides a base child support number without consideration of income or parenting time. This would be a difficult provision to enforce in Michigan.

What else is noteworthy in this Judgment? Well, Brooke signed a prenup or “Premarital Agreement” on May 27, 2008, before she married Charlie. The Divorce Judgment abides by this prenup, which means that Brooke receives zero spousal support. Yes, Brooke waived her right to alimony now and forever. While that may be surprising in this divorce to waive alimony, it is pretty common in most divorces.

Anything else stick out? Brooke agrees to never talk to the media about Charlie’s alleged sexual affairs and alleged drug use, and Charlie agrees never to talk to the media about Brooke’s alleged drug use. Interesting.

By taking a closer look at Charlie and Brooke’s Divorce Judgment, one can easily see that despite their celebrity status, Charlie and Brooke’s issues are resolved in a pretty standard way.


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.

Spousal Support (Alimony) is Based Upon More than Just a Difference in Income

A common misperception of people going through a divorce in Michigan is that spousal support (formerly called alimony) is based solely or mostly upon a difference in income between the spouses. While it is true that the court considers income when deciding if spousal support should be awarded—income is just 1 of 14 factors that the courts review.

In deciding whether or not spousal support should be awarded, the court must review the following factors before a decision is made, Berger v Berger, 277 Mich App 700, 726-7 (2008):

1. The past relations and conduct of both spouses
2. The length of the marriage
3. The ability of both spouses to work
4. The source and amount of property awarded to each spouse
5. The spouses’ respective ages
6. The ability of both spouses to pay spousal support
7. The present situation of each spouse
8. The needs of each spouse
9. The health of each spouse
10. The prior standard of living of the couple and whether either is responsible for the support of others
11. Contributions of the spouses respectively to joint marital property
12. A spouse’s fault in causing the divorce
13. The effect of cohabitation on the spouse’s financial status
14. General principles of equity.

There are no hard and fast rules for determining if spousal support should be awarded, how much should be awarded and for how long. Each case is reviewed independently and separately to determine the answer to these questions.

If you are interested in learning more about child support, divorce or family law, 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. 

Al & Tipper Gore and the Silver Divorce

-->

A recent article in Newsweek reflected that the recent divorce announcement by Al & Tipper Gore is actually reflective of the marriage and divorce trends, and that there is a rise in what is called the “Silver Divorce,” which is a divorce between couples who have spent at least 25 married years together.

There are some significant issues that become immediately important in “Silver Divorces” when the couple has been married for a significant amount of time. This includes issues of retirement, pensions, spousal support, and even social security.

Michigan law dictates that all marital assets are to be split equally when a couple divorces. This means that if one of the spouses has an IRA, 401(k), or pension, that must be valued (determine what the marital portion is) and that marital portion must be shared equally.

Also, in long-term marriages, the courts will often grant a request of spousal support (alimony). The length of time and the amount will vary from situation to situation—but it is an important consideration and in many cases, absolutely necessary for one of the spouses.

Lastly, it is important that the issue of social security is addressed. If you have been married 10 years, then even after a divorce, one spouse may be able to collect social security based upon the other spouse’s work record. This is something that should be definitely be discussed with an attorney.

Whether or not there is a trend toward more “Silver Divorces,” what is crystal clear is that if you have been married that long, you need to be well equipped with a skilled divorce lawyer so that you are fully aware of what your rights are, what options exist for you, and how to prepare for your financial security moving forward.

You can read the Newsweek article here: The Rise of the ‘Silver Divorce’

 

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.