Teran v. Rittley
313 Mich. App. 197
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Child born in Quito, Ecuador (Nov 2006). Plaintiff sued for paternity/support; initial Virginia action was dismissed (Feb 7, 2008).
- Plaintiff filed a paternity action in Otsego County, Michigan (Sept 2010); defendant entered appearance and DNA testing established paternity; filiation entered Aug 2011 and matter referred to Friend of the Court (FOC).
- FOC calculated support using stated incomes and recommended $1,211/month. Defendant sought dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under MCL 722.714, asserting none of the parties lived in Michigan.
- Trial (two days, parties testified by phone) focused on amount of support and whether to deviate from the Michigan Child Support Formula (MCSF) because child and mother lived in Ecuador; expert converted foreign incomes to Michigan purchasing power and recommended a lower support amount.
- Trial court denied the jurisdictional motion, adopted the FOC amount ($1,211), declined to deviate based on geographic cost-of-living differences, made support retroactive to Feb 7, 2008, and awarded plaintiff $23,000 in attorney fees (including some expense for out-of-state counsel).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subject-matter jurisdiction under MCL 722.714 | Michigan has jurisdiction to adjudicate paternity/support; statute governs venue not jurisdiction | Statute is jurisdictional; court lacks power because mother, child, and father allegedly lived outside Michigan | Court has subject-matter jurisdiction; MCL 722.714 speaks to venue; circuit courts presumptively have jurisdiction over such claims |
| Amount of child support / deviation from MCSF | Follow FOC/MCSF recommendation; deviation not warranted here | Reduce support to reflect lower cost of living where mother/child live (expert testimony converting purchasing power) | Court may not generally deviate based solely on geographic cost-of-living; no unjust or inappropriate result shown, so MCSF amount stands |
| Retroactive support start date | Retroactivity to date Virginia case dismissed is appropriate due to defendant’s delay/avoidance | Retroactivity not warranted beyond filing date in Michigan | Retroactive support to Feb 7, 2008 upheld under MCL 722.717(2) (defendant delayed imposition of support) |
| Attorney fees award | Fees reasonable; inclusion of out-of-state counsel’s expense was necessary and recoverable | Out-of-state counsel didn’t appear; plaintiff should not recover full reimbursement | Award of $23,000 not an abuse of discretion; court properly found plaintiff unable to pay and defendant able; expense of out-of-state, Spanish-speaking counsel was a necessary component |
Key Cases Cited
- Altman v. Nelson, 197 Mich App 467 (Michigan Ct. App.) (Paternity Act confers circuit court authority to determine paternity)
- LME v. ARS, 261 Mich App 273 (Mich. Ct. App.) (Paternity Act and circuit-court jurisdiction to order paternity/support)
- Gladis v. Gladisova, 382 Md 654 (Md. 2004) (geographic cost-of-living not a proper basis to deviate from guidelines)
- Verbeke v. Verbeke, 352 Mich 632 (Mich.) (cost-of-living differences abroad do not justify reduced support)
- Polkton Charter Twp v. Pellegrom, 265 Mich App 88 (Mich. Ct. App.) (statutory interpretation principles; circuit court presumption of jurisdiction)