807 N.W.2d 914
Mich. Ct. App.2011Background
- Divorce judgment entered September 13, 2005, awarding plaintiff the South Madison home and setting child and spousal support.
- Plaintiff remarried in 2005 and deeded the South Madison home to himself and his new wife as tenants by the entirety.
- Plaintiff later operated Bay County Abstract, which ceased operations; he filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy and fell behind on support.
- Court orders in 2007 and 2009 instructed liquidation of plaintiff's retirement accounts to satisfy support obligations and ordered attachment of the South Madison home.
- Court also ordered that 50 percent of plaintiff's current income be withheld for spousal support.
- Appeals centered on (A) attachment of the tenancy-by-the-entirety home and (B) the 50% income-withholding order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the South Madison home, held as tenancy by the entirety, can be attached to satisfy a divorce judgment. | Home ownership by entirety should shield the property from attachment for individual debts. | Judgment lien can reach jointly owned property held as tenancy by the entirety if the underlying debt is the joint debt. | Attachment not allowed; lien cannot attach to tenancy by the entirety unless underlying debt is against both spouses. |
| Whether Michigan law permits a judgment lien to attach a tenancy-by-the-entirety property when the underlying judgment is not entered against both spouses. | tenancy-by-the-entirety protects property from single-spouse debts; the judgment was not against both. | Statutory scheme permits attachment when the debt is joint; equity considerations do not override statute. | Judgment lien does not attach; the property cannot be used to satisfy the divorce judgment. |
| Whether the 50 percent income-withholding order for spousal support complies with federal limits. | Not explicit in text; implied challenge to the amount or method. | Withholding 50 percent is within typical federal limits and supports compliance with orders. | Income withholding affirmed at 50 percent; within 50% cap under federal law. |
Key Cases Cited
- Reed v Reed, 265 Mich App 131 (2005) (affects deference to trial court findings in divorce matters)
- Sparks v Sparks, 440 Mich 141 (1992) (guides discretionary dispositional rulings in divorce context)
- Walters v Leech, 279 Mich App 707 (2008) (tenancy by the entirety; survivorship and protection from individual debts)
- Morgan v Cincinnati Ins Co, 411 Mich 267 (1981) (tenancy by the entirety concepts in modern law)
- Vyletel-Rivard v Rivard, 286 Mich App 13 (2009) (statutory interpretation of 600.2807(1) in lien context)